ManagingAgricultural Resources forBiodiversity Conservation:

Annotated Bibliography

Barbara Gemmill, Pamela Cunneyworth,Hannah Nadel & Ana Milena Varela

October 2001

Copyright: @Environment Liaison Centre International andUnited Nations Environment Programme, 2001Reproduction of this publication for educationaland other non-commercial purposes isauthorized without prior permission from thecopyright holder, providing the source is fullyacknowledged. Reproduction of thepublication for resale or for other commercialpurposes is prohibited without prior writtenpermission from the copyright holder.

Citation: Gemmill, B, P. Cunneyworth, H. Nadel & A.Varela, Managing Agricultural Resources forBiodiversity Conservation: An AnnotatedBibliography. Vol. 1 ELCI and UNEP, Nairobi,Kenya.

Acknowledgment: This publication was produced for the UNDP-UNEP-GEF Biodiversity Planning SupportProgramme, as part of the sub-projectintegration of Biodiversity into NationalAgricultural Sectors GF/1200-99-73).

1 INTRODUCTION

One of the outcomes of the RIO SUMMIT (United Nations ConferenceOn environment and Development) of 1992 was the signing of theConvention on Biological Diversity, which has now been ratified byover 100 countries. By ratifying this convention, countries commit toimplementing the agreements and programme of work as it isdeveloped through the “Conferences of Parties”, which occur more orless every two years.

When the Convention was originally drafted, agricultural biodiversitywas not included as an aspect of biodiversity. But such a clamour hasbeen raised as to the importance of agrobiodiversity, and so muchattention has been drawn to such trend as: the precipitous loss oflandraces of cultivated crops, and the very large proportion ofbiodiversity, in general, that occurs in human-dominated landscapes.As a consequence, agricultural biodiversity was included in the scopeof the convention, and FAO was given the mandate as overalltaskmaster for the subject.

To a large degree, the focus on agrobiodiversity up until now has beenon conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources, and itsconcomitant issues of access to genetic resources (for example, byplant breeders or pharmaceutical researchers) and fair and equitablebenefit sharing (with communities or indigenous peoples who haveshared or shepherded such resources over time).

However, the Convention on Biological Diversity has recognized itsneed to liaise thoroughly with the scientific community and through thisliaison, with respect to agricultural biodiversity, a number of otherthematic focal areas have been established. The present list of areasare:

Pollinators.Soil biodiversityBiodiversity that provides mitigation of pests and diseasesCrop genetic resourcesLivestock genetic resourcesDiversity at the landscape levelWild biodiversity in agroecosystems

It is now accepted that the “Programme of work” of the Conventionon Biological Diversity should include the conservation, sustainable useand benefit sharing of all of these focal areas.

Countries facing the need to now develop strategies to addressagrobiodiversity have expressed a number of difficulties. The conceptas a whole is very new, even if it may relate to many traditionalpractices. Bringing a new discipline into the policy arena meansexploring relatively uncharted territory. ELCI is undertaking a project,in collaboration with the UNEP/GEF Biodiversity Planning SupportProgram, to develop guidelines for integrating biodiversityconservation into national agricultural policies. As a first step in thisundertaking, we have been reviewing the current literature on thetopic, and offer our review here as an annotated bibliography, as awork in progress.

2 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

# 1 Aarnink, W., S. Bunning, L. Collette and P. Mulvany. (1999).Sustaining Agricultural Biodiversity and Agroecosystem Functions.Opportunities, incentives and approaches for the conservation andsustainable use of agricultural biodiversity in agroecosystems andproduction systems. Report of an International Workshop, FAOHeadquarters, Rome, 2-4 December 1998. Available at:http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/SUSTDEV/Epdirect/Epre0080.htm

This is a report of an international workshop on agriculturalbiodiversity from 2-4 December 1998, organized by the Conventionon Biological Diversity (CBD) together with the FAO, and withsupport of the government of Netherlands. Over 60 participantsattended from 20 countries and 15 international and regionalorganizations.

Focusing on agro-ecosystem and production system levels theworkshop helped to identify the main elements required in order toprovide enabling environments and technical, policy, institutionaland legal incentives, from global to local levels, for theconservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity. Theaim of the workshop was: -stimulate work at country level andwithin institutions; -provide expert advice to FAO and the CBD onthe assessment of ongoing activities and existing instruments; -assistFAO and the CBD to identify complementary and synergisticactivities; and –contribute to the FAO-Netherlands Conference onthe Multifunctional Character of Agricultural and Land.

The workshop concluded that four sets of actions for theconservation and sustainable use of all agricultural biodiversityespecially at agro-ecosystem levels should be prioritized. Theworkshop prioritized actions related to: 1 – information, assessmentand indicators; 2- research and development; 3-awareness raisingand capacity building; and 4-development of policies andinstruments.

In the light of the priorities and bearing in mind the opportunities,incentives and approaches discussed in the workshop, theparticipants made the following recommendations.

♦ Widening the understanding of agricultural biodiversity bypromoting a concept whereby agricultural biodiversityencompasses the variety and variability of animals, plants

and micro organisms which are necessary to sustain keyfunctions of the agroecosystem, its structure and processesfor, and in support of, food production and food security.

♦ Encouraging the maintenance, sustainable use andenhancement of all types and levels of agriculturebiodiversity in all types of production systems from diverseto specialized, small-to large scale and intensive toextensive systems.

♦ Improving integration and coordination of activities andprocesses for sustaining agricultural biodiversity,productivity and agroecosystem functions. The inclusionof actions plans for the conservation and sustainable useof agricultural biodiversity in national biodiversity,environmental and agricultural policies, strategies, plansand programmes as well as in those of key institutions.

♦ All organizations in the field of sustainable developmentneed to work further to integrate and mainstreamagricultural biodiversity in their policies, programmes andactivities.

♦ Three dimensions of agricultural biodiversity which couldbe useful for increasing understanding and as a structurefor future programmes and plans were identified: -sustainable production of agricultural products improvingthe conservation, sustainable use and enhancement ofthe diversity of all genetic resources for food andagriculture; -biological support to production emphasizingconservation, sustainable use enhancement of biologicalresources; - ecological and social services provided byagroecosystems.

The reports presents in form of annexes – a matrix for analysisand synthesis of relevant ongoing activities and instruments, -Prioritisation of issues and activities for the conservation andsustainable use of agrobiodiversity in agroecosystems andproduction systems; and –an analysis of required actions forenhancing agrobiodiversity and production in intensiveproduction systems in selected agroecosystems.

Coverage: Global

Case studies or examples from: Brazil, El Salvador, France,Peru, Senegal and Vietnam.

# 2 AERU. 200. Environmental Management for Agriculture. Agricultureand Environment Research Unit, University of Hertfordshire, UK.

The EMA software runs on Windows 95 (or higher) and is available on

CD for a cost of 35 pounds (+VAT 41.13 pounds) per copy. If you wouldlike to purchase a copy please send your name, address and acheque made payable to “The University of Hertfordshire” to: KathyLewis/John Tzilivakis, Agriculture and the Environment Research Unit,Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Hertfordshire.Hatfield Campus, College Lone, Hatfield, Hertfordshire. AL 10 9 ABUnited Kingdom. Alternatively, you can order a copy by Tel/Fax: 01707284548/285258 or Email: HYPERLINK mailto:ema@herts.ac.ukema@herts.ac.uk and a copy will be sent with n invoice for 35 pounds (+VAAT 41.13pounds).

Environmental Management for Agriculture (EMA) is computersoftware that aims to encourage farmers to improve theirenvironmental performance. Its target audience is farmers in theUnited Kingdom. The approach is based on the principles andphilosophy of formal environmental management standards such asISO 14001, as used by other industrial sectors. These systems useauditing techniques to assess and review the environmentalperformance of a business. Carried out on a regular basis (e.g.annually) the aim is to establish a cycle of continuous improvement inenvironmental performance. EMA provides an environment audit(Evaluation System) to help identify the key impacts of the farm,opportunities for improvement and thus environmental objectives.Advisory and Technical systems are available to help the businessachieve those objectives by providing useful information and decisionsupport on best practice for the farm.

Topics: environmental audit, on-farm impacts, off-site impacts, decisionsystems.

# 3 Allen-Wardell, G.P. Bernhardt, R. Bitner, A. Burquez, S. Buchmann, J.Cane, P.A. Cox, V. Dalton, P. Feinsinger, D. Inouye, M. Ingram, C.E.Jones, K. Kennedy, G.P. Nabham, B. Pavlik, V. Tepedino, P. Torchio andS. Walker. 1998. The potential consequence of pollinator declines onthe conservation of biodiversity and stability of food crop yields.Conservation Biology 12: 8-17.

An initial article attempting a valuation of pollination as an ecosystemservice, and the impact of its loss on agricultural productivity.

Coverage: primarily North America

Topics: pollination, ecosystem services, valuation

# 4 Almekinders, C. and W. de Boef. 2000. Encouraging Diversity: CropDevelopment and Conservation in Plant Genetic Resources.Intermediate Technology Publications, London. 368pp.

This compendium presents case studies of plant genetic resourcesconservation in many countries. The case studies document theapparent conflict between crop conservation and development, andcontribute to an understanding of the new opportunities that areoffered by new approaches and activities and perspectives ofgenebanks, plant breeders, seed programmes and NGOs involved incrop development and conservation, placing them in the context ofnew approaches in local and global Plant Genetic Resource (PGR)management by both the formal and informal sector.The last part of the book describes the next step in the debate aroundPGR management and discusses the implications of integrated andadaptive management approaches in PGR management.

Coverage: Global

Case studies from: Ethiopia, Kenya, Zimbabwe, India, Nepal, Ecuador,Peru

Topics: crop genetic resource conservation, farmer’s rights

# 5 Altieri, M. A. 1999. Multifunctional dimensions of ecologically-basedagriculture in Latin America. Department of Environmental SciencePolicy and Management University of California, Berkeley. Paperprepared for the FAO/Netherlands Conference on the “MultifunctionalCharacter of Agriculture”. Sep. 13-17, 1999.http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/~agfroeco3/multifunctional_dimensions.html

http://www.igc.apc.org/csdngo/agriculture.agr.

Today in Latin America there are still regions with microcosms oftraditional farming systems, (i.e., in Mesoamerica, the Andean region,and the Amazon Basin) that have emerged over centuries of culturaland biological evolution and that based on locally available resourcesand the cultivation of a diversity of crops and varieties in time andspace, have allowed traditional farmers to maximize harvest securityand the multiple use of the landscape with limited environmentalimpact. Agro-biodiverse traditional agroecosystems represent astrategy which ensures diverse diets and income sources, stableproduction, minimum risk, efficient use of land resources, andenhanced ecological integrity. This legacy of traditional agriculturedemonstrate that the combination of stable and diverse production,internally generated and maintainable inputs, favorable energy

input/output ratios, and articulation with both subsistence and marketneeds, comprises an effective approach to achieve food security,income generation, and environmental conservation. Traditionalapproaches represent multiple use strategies that enhance themultifunctional nature of agriculture, an important feature for thehealth of rural regions in the next century.

Coverage: Latin America

Topics: farm level management of agrobiodiversity, traditionalapproaches

# 6 BAA. 1997. Arable Wildlife: Protecting Non-target Species. BritishAgro-chemicals Association. Peterborough, UK. 90pp.

(can be ordered from the British Agrochemical Association, 4 LincolnCourt, Lincoln Road, Peterborough PE1 2RP or from British CropProtection Council, tel. +44 (0) 119 934 2727,

Within agricultural landscapes, wildlife may abound. A few species – inrelative terms a tiny minority – have adverse effects on people andagriculture, and must be kept in check. There is a reason for farmers tobe concerned about impacts of modern agriculture on non-targetspecies, even beyond the biodiversity implications. Increasedmechanization, changed rotations, more efficient weedkillers andpressures to maximize agricultural output to produce cheap food haveall imposed changes that have impacted on non-target species. Thecenters of large fields are beyond the normal range of natural hedge-dwelling predators; fewer hedges mean fewer nesting sites and sheltersfor birds that may help control pests, larger and heavier machinerymeans potential damage to soil structure and loss of soil fauna throughcultivation, etc.

This booklet provides a set of general guidelines to show farmers andadvisors (in the UK, but with principles applicable elsewhere) that givencommitment and skill, backed by knowledge and understanding, non-target species can be protected without prejudicing productivity orprofitability. The objectives in protecting arable wildlife should be:

• The conservation and enhancement of the diversity of the naturallyoccurring plants and wildlife of the whole farm and surroundingareas.

• optimisation of the contribution available from natural pestpredators by the integration of measures that will encourage thebuild-up of the whole populations.

• optimization of then contribution that can be made by croprotations to discourage the build up of pest populations anddisease.

# 7 Bhar, B. and L. Fahrig. 1998. Local vs. landscape effects of woodyfield borders as barriers to crop pest movement. Conservation Ecology[online] 2(2): 3. Available from the internet. URL:http://www.consecol.org/vol2/iss2/art3

Maintenance of woody borders surrounding crop fields is desirable forbiodiversity conservation. However, for crop pest management, thedesirability of woody borders depends on the trade-off between theireffects at the local field scale and the landscape scale. At the localscale, woody borders can reduce pest populations by increasingpredations by providing complementary habits and reducingmovement rate of pests out of crop fields. At the regional scale,woody borders reduce pest populations by reducing colonization ofnewly planted crop fields. Our objective was to develop guidelines formaximizing pest control while maintaining woody borders in thelandscape. We wished to determine the conditions under which theregional effect of borders on colonization can outweigh localenhancement effects of borders on pest populations. We built astochastic, individual-based, spatially implicit simulation model of aspecialist insect population in landscape divided into a number ofcrop fields. We woody borders on local survival. The simulation resultssuggest that woody borders are most likely to enhance regionalcontrol of crop pests if (1) the woody borders are very effective inreducing insect movement from one crop field to another, and (2)crop rotation is on a very short cycle. Based on these results, ourpreliminary recommendations are that woody borders should containdense, tall vegetation to reduce on as short a cycle as possible. Theseconditions should ensure that woody borders can be maintained fortheir conservation value without enhancing crop pest populations. Theresults are encouraging because the two most important factors arenot sensitive to details of pest habitat use; the recommendationsshould apply across most pest species.

Topics: conducted simulations to determine the conditions underwhich woody borders enhanced vs. reduce the regional pestpopulation size. The following factors were considered: landscapefragmentation, crop rotation period, barrier effect of biodiversity thatmitigates pest and diseases, landscape level agrobiodiversity.

Coverage: theoretical (simulation model)

# 8 Boatman, N. (ed.). 1994. Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture andConservation. Proceedings of a Symposium organized by the BritishCrop Protection Council in association with the British EcologicalSociety and the Association of Applied Biologists, held at University ofWarwick, Coventry, on 18-20 April 1994. BCPC, Survey, UK. 404pp.

(can be ordered from British Crop Protection Council, tel. +44 (0) 118934 2727, publications@bpcp.org , http//www.bcpc.org)

Whereas recently field margins were viewed by arable farmers as asource of weeks, pests and diseases, the benefits of marginal habitatsas reservoirs of beneficial invertebrates, predators of pest species ofcrop pollinators are becoming more widely understood. Field marginshave amenity values in countryside, in providing migration corridors fororganisms, and providing the last haven for wildlife in an otherwisehostile environment created by intensive modern farming.

The role and management of field margins in agriculture has changedin recent years. Many formerly mixed farms have become entirelyarable, and hedges have lost their previous purpose. Increased labourcosts have led to a decline in the practice of traditional labour-intensive maintenance techniques such as hedge-laying and drystonewalling. This has been accelerated in stock rearing areas byincreased stocking rates, resulting in intensive grazing pressure onhedge bases. Increased use of inorganic fertilizers and pesticides oncrops may have effects on the fauna and flora of field edges via drift,surface run off or leaching into drainage ditches.

Yet policies may bring new changes: Commodity surplus have shiftedagricultural support policy away from productivity-oriented incentivesto production stabilizing mechanisms, with environmental benefitsbecoming an increasingly prominent factor in policy and spendingdecisions at national and European levels.

Case studies from: United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany

Topics: grants and incentive measure, field margins, conservationheadlands, arable wildlife.

# 9 Bohart, G.E. 1972. Management of wild bees for pollination of crops.Annual Review of Entomology 17: 287-312.

Coverage: North America

Topics: pollination

# 10 Boulouc, G. 1998. Relance de l’Aubrac laitiere. Cooperationfromagiere “jeune montagne”. available on old CBD Website:http://216.95.224.231/agro/Casestudies.html

This short notes describes the actions of a dairy cooperative in thestraddling the region of mid-Pyrenees, Languedoc and Auverge ofSouthern France, to revive an local breed of cattle, and by cross-breeding, introduce traits which will promote both milk production andlocal adaptation. Acknowledging that the objective will be ten ortwenty years off, the producers nonetheless are hopeful ofreestablishing the quality of their cheese production through use oflocal agrobiodiversity.

Topics: livestock genetic resources

Coverage: France

Includes cased study from: France

# 11 Brookfield, H. 2001, Exploring Agrodiversity. Columbia UniversityPress, New York. 347 pp.

The author, lead scientist on the multi-year, multi country people, Landand Environment change project of UNEP GEF, defines agrodiversity asthe manner in which farmers use all their available resources. This bookis an exploration of the issue, and how it has evolved in the author’sconceptualization as he has looked back over his and others’experiences in the field over forty years. As he notes, the dynamicdiversity of small farmer’s practices has only the most limited formalliterature, and that which exists is of uneven geographic overage. Thelarger literature on human ecology filed research with small farmers isexamined and illuminated by the author’s own field-work, tounderstand incremental patterns of agricultural change over time.

In the first section of the book, agrobiodiversity is presented byexamples and concept, and as field of study. The place of diversity inagricultural history is discussed, and in a separate chapter, a thesis isdrawn concerning anthropogenic influences on soil formation. In thesecond part, shifting cultivation is examined quite closely over severalchapters, including its range of practices and adaptations. The thirdsection of the book looks at trajectories of change, with an emphasison those periods of intensified change, including but not limited to thegreen Revolution. The fourth section of the book turns to moderntrends and forces in agriculture, with an emphasis on trade and policyinfluences on the question of sustainability of agrodiversity.

Coverage: Global

Topics: landscape level diversity, human ecology, traditionalknowledge of agrobiodiversity.

Case studies or examples from: Borneo, India, Japan, Java, Kenya,Malaysia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Sudan,Zambia.

# 12 Brookfield, H. and C. Padoch. 1994. AppreciatingAgrobiodiversity: A look at the dynamism and diversity of indigenousfarming practices. Environment 36(5): 6-11 and 37-44.

This article introduced the “People, Land and Environment Change”project of United Nations University, also introduced the notion thatvariability on the farm scale may be the source of humanity’s bestsolutions for agriculture and land management in the future. Cropbiodiversity is seen as only part of a wider complex of farmers’management practices. This wider framework is called“agrobiodiversity”, or the many ways in which farmers use the naturaldiversity of the environment for production, including not only theirchoice of crops but also their management of land, water and biotaas a whole. There is a close relationship between agrodiversity andmanaged biodiversity. Because of the diversity of cropping andresource systems that exists, agrodiversity serves as a major means ofconserving both structural and species biodiversity.

Farmers vary their practices according to intraseasonal variability,changing them to suit new economic circumstances, new crop andmarketing opportunities, and growing population and demand. Theyuse scientific information when available, but even without it, theyoften adapt with remarkable sensitivity and speed. “The importancequestion is not which traditional practices, as practiced in the past, aresustainable, nut rather which conditions favour destruction, oroverexploitation of local resources.”

The paradigm proposed in this paper is applied, as an example, to theissue of land degradation, where it is noted that the question isresponsibility for land degradation is a complex issue, not amenable toany simple generalization. Recent studies in Africa show how manysmallholders have shown great resilience in adapting their agriculturalsystems to the larger socioeconomic conditions in the face of highpopulation pressure and unprecedented population growth.

The paper makes some interesting observations on the renewed stresson “ traditional knowledge.” It notes that the role of the farmers’ ownknowledge and adaptability has continued to be undervalued untilvery lately. Now the pendulum appears to be swinging in the oppositedirection, with an emphasis on traditional knowledge. The use of

indigenous technical knowledge is somewhat in danger of beingtreated as a new solution to all problems of development. This is anextreme view and it is more valuable to discuss the problems of usingfarmers’ knowledge in parallel with “scientific” knowledge. Moreimportance is the blending of old with new practices, the ability offarmers to innovate, adapt and adopt. What farmers know is certainlyimportant, but this knowledge changes through time, and this fact is ofgreat importance.

Moreover, there are problems in the use of small farmers’ practicesand knowledge. Many agricultural scientists and developmentspecialists are reluctant to accent indigenous knowledge, and themanagement systems based on it, as having scientific value.Indigenous knowledge is often place-specific, and in both structureand cultural context, it is different from that of “rational science”. Tomany scientists, this reasoning has been an insuperable objection tothe acceptability of indigenous knowledge in anything but asubordinate role. But the very specificity of indigenous knowledge thathas been viewed as a weakness also is its strength. The history anddiversity of local circumstances and changes are reflected in thatknowledge and in the production systems that incorporate it. Therichness of agrodiversity is the result. The paper then addresses how tocapture and codify such information, which if recorded, is largely left inthe domain of “grey literature” of reports and photocopied papers.The paper makes an argument that there is a compelling need forstructured networking among regions, not only to gather informationon agrodiversity, but also to demystify an area still dominated bypreconceived notions derived from simple theories.

Coverage: Global

Contains examples or case studies from: Peru, Papua, New Guinea,Irian Java, Philippines, Indonesian, Borneo, Kenya

# 13 Brown, L. 1996. Tough Choices: Facing the Challenges of FoodScarcity. Worldwatch Publications, Washington, D.C. orderinginformation at: http://www.worldwatch.org

Conservation of agrobiodiversity will have to be achieved in thecontext of contending with food security.

Food scarcity may be the first major economic manifestation of anenvironmentally unsustainable global economy. Brown argues thatthe continually expanding demand for food is colliding with some ofthe earth’s natural limits, including the sustainable yield of oceanicfisheries, the sustainable yield of the aquifers that supply irrigationwater, and the physiological limits of crop varieties to use fertilizer.

Tough choices notes that while the growth in production is slowing, thegrowth in demand may be growing faster than ever before. The worldcontinues to add 90 million people a year, but in addition, the Asianeconomy, led by China, is growing by 8 percent a year, boostingincomes and the consumption of grain-intensive livestock products atrecord rates. As the region’s 3.1 billion people, more than half theworld total, move up the food chain, it puts great pressure on theearth’s land and water resources.

Tough choices addresses the choices nations will need to makecontending with population growth and consequent natural resourcesunder stress.

Coverage: Global

Agroecosystem focus: General

# 14 Brush, S.B. (ed). 2000. Genes in the Field: On-farm Conservation ofCrop diversity. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, US. 288pp.

Only recently has the Worlds’ scientific community understood that avast amount of diversity is being conserved on-farm, by farmers’practices, and that this holds value of global significance.Approximately 1.4 billion people live in farm families that are largelyself-reliant and self-provisioning for their seeds and other plantingmaterials. While farmers continue to see advantage in this way ofmaintaining seed material, or while they have no other alternatives, thisform of conservation of resources will continue to exist. Many otherforces, however, are impacting on on-farm plant genetic resourceconservation.

This edited volume is a collection of papers focusing on agriculturalconservation and diversity issues throughout the world. Geneticdiversity is important to individual farmers, farming communities and tothe agricultural community in general, but there are many differentviewpoints on the efficacy of on-farm conservation. This book providesan opportunity for various authors from widely different backgrounds toexplore issue raised around in-situ conservation. Recent trends suggestthat regional and local farm seed varieties are being lost, aspopulation increase, and modern agricultural technology and tradereach the world’s diverse cultures. The chapters discuss both in situand ex situ conservation strategies, and relevant policy issues.

Coverage: Global

Topics: Plant genetic resource conservation, intellectual property rights

Case studies or examples from: Ethiopia, Fertile Crescent, Mexico, Peru,Zimbabwe.

# 15 Buchmann, S. L., and G. P. Nabhan. 1996. The ForgottenPollinators. Island Press, Covelo, CA 292 pp.

The authors, of this popular book, an entomologist and anethnobotanist and nature writer, illustrate in clear yet proficientlanguage the importance of pollination between insect and plant,which provides the world with one-third of its food source. Usingcolorful examples-including a moth that rappels down cliffs to pollinatea plant in Hawaii – they also explain how modern developments arethreatening this essential process.The book is aimed at raising awareness about the potential loss ofpollinators and their plants, while showing the larger picture of a fragileecosystem through the eyes of some of its more unnoticed in-habitants.

Coverage: Global

Topics: pollination, ecosystem services

Case studies from: Mexico, United States, New Zealand, Madagascar,Brazil, Malaysia

# 16 Cane, J.H. 2001. Habitat fragmentation and native bees: apremature verdict? Conservation Ecology 5(1): 3. [online] URL:http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss1/art3

This very recent article considers what would be required in designingpollination reserves.

Few studies directly address the consequences of habitatfragmentation for communities of pollinating insects, particularly for thekey pollinator group, bees (Hymenoptera: Apiformes). Bees typicallylive in habitats where nesting substrates and bloom are patchilydistributed and spatially dissociated. Bee studies have all definedhabitat fragments as remnant patches of floral hosts or forests,overlooking the nesting needs of bees. Networks of even small reservesmay hold hope for sustaining considerable pollinator diversity and theecological services pollinators provide.

Coverage: Global

Topics: pollination

Case studies or examples from: Brazil, Argentina, Germany and US.

# 17 CBD Secretariat. No date. Assessing the Impact of TradeLiberalization on the Conservation and sustainable Use of AgriculturalBiological Diversity. Note on an assessment under preparation by theSecretariat.

This note is intended to provide information on an assessment currentlybeing prepared by the Secretariat of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity on the impact of trade liberalization on the conservation andsustainable use of agricultural biological diversity in consultation withrelevant bodies, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO). Thestudy will be submitted to SBSTAA VII under the agenda item on theCBD’s programme of work on Agricultural Biodiversity.

The primary focus of this study is to examine the extent to which tradeliberalization affects biodiversity, through changes in the farm sector.The agricultural sector is noteworthy for its pervasive, deep andpersistent trade restrictions and distortions. Since the 1950s adeepening spiral of protection has occurred, for the most part inindustrialized countries, and more recently in some transitionaleconomy countries. In response to this labyrinth of trade restrictions, inthe 1990s governments tentatively began a long process towardstrade liberalization reforms in the farm sector.

The study looks both at previous and expected future impacts of tradeliberalization on price, with an aggregate impact resulting from thesimultaneous drop in price-suppressing subsidies and price-increasingtariffs expected to the mixed and ambiguous, but leading on averageto an increase in farm output prices.

Impacts of reduced subsidies, which can be expected with tradeliberalization may be beneficial to agrobiodiversity, as a reduction insubsidies applied for the most part in developed countries lowersincentives for the over-application of pesticides and fertilizers, lowerpressures on the conversion of vulnerable or ecological significantlands into arable production, and lowers other kinds of productionpressures, including irrigation withdrawals. However, reduction insubsides may eliminate financial support in the farm sector – includingdecoupled farm payments – on greenbelt areas, landscapingobjectives and land set-aside initiatives and spur farmers towardshigher levels of economic and production efficiencies, includingconcentrating production intensities and altering crop outputs.

Resulting changes in farm production methods are discussed, asproduction efficiency is enhanced in the agricultural sector. Farmproduction modernization is often characterized by more intense land

tillage, including tillage of sloping areas; an increased reliance onfreshwater inputs, including irrigation, which often exert water qualityand quantity effects; the adoption of monoculture crops inspecialization objectives; the concentration of livestock operations;and reliance on agro-chemical inputs. Although all farming representsthe conversion of natural resources and changes in habitats,technified, concentrated, specialized and large scale farm productiontends to push wildlife outside of the farm system. Among thecharacteristics of industrialized or homogeneous factors of agriculturalproduction is an increased reliance on fertilizer and pesticide inputs.Pesticide and other agro-chemicals, which by intent destroy targetspecies, also by accident disrupt or destroy non-target species. Soilcompaction causes water to infiltrate the soil differently, which mayincrease the risks of runoff and erosion. Nutrient cycles can besignificantly altered, as nutrient-based fertilizers bring about changes insoil bacteria and vegetation. A key concern of farm modernizationrelated to a reliance on a narrow range of plant varieties for total foodoutput is higher risks of genetic vulnerability, that is, when a widelyplanted crop is susceptible to a pest, pathogen or environmentalhazard, leading to the possibility of sudden and widespread croplosses.

In addition to these more well understood aspects of tradeliberalization, the summary also notes possible impacts of changes ininternational and domestic transportation on agricultural productionsystems, which remove natural barriers as policy removes artificialbarriers. Concerns related to alien invasive species under new traderegimes are considered, and income and equity effects ofliberalization on the rural poor. Mention is made of new developmentsin relation to increased consumer demand for sustainably producedfood products.

# 18 Clapperton, J. no date. Worm Watch. Submission of the CanadianGovernment to SBSTTA. Available for download on the CBD website:http://www.biodlv.org/areas/agro/case-studies.asp. More informationon website: http://www.cclw.co/ecowatch/wormwatch/

Worm watch is a program that is being initiated by the Canadiangovernment to promote awareness of the diversity of “life beneath ourfeet” through public participation in a nationwide earthworm census.The census takers will be students, farmers, and producer groups,conservation and naturalist groups, gardeners and interestedindividuals and families. They will be supplied Warm Watch kitcontaining background material on earthworm ecology andtaxonomy, instructions on how to sample and record their data,datasheets, a photographic key showing the most commonlyencountered earthworm species, vials for the preservation of

earthworms that could not be identified, and a list of references,including a wormwatch website and a too-free number. Aninstructional video demonstrating the various sampling techniquesshould also be available. Scientists will make use of the data collectedto inventory and study the distribution of earthworm species inCanada, including correlations between landuse patterns (includingundisturbed vs. disturbed habitats, cropping systems, and tillagepractices) ecozones, and earthworm populations and speciesdiversity. The data collected should significantly increase the scientificcommunity’s understanding of the biogeography of post glaciationearthworm populations, and the history of their distribution. It can alsobe used to evaluate the potential of using earthworms as one of asuite of bioindicators of environmentally sustainable land use practices,and the information on species diversity and preferred habitat will beuseful when considering policies on introducing earthworms for wastemanagement, integrated pest management, soil improvement, andsite reclamation.

Topics: soil biodiversity, public awareness of agrodiversity.

Coverage: Canada

# 19 Collins, W.W. & C.O. Qualset. 1999. Biodiversity inAgroecosystems. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.334pp.

The first three chapters address belowground biodiversity inagroecosystems. Chapter One (Ann C. Kennedy) covers soil microbesin general, chapter Two (Stuart S. Bamforth) focuses on soil protozoa,and chapter Three (Deborah A. Neher & Mary E. Barbercheck) coversmesofauna (medium-sized invertebrates). This portion of the bookreviews the function of belowground biodiversity in agroecosystemproductivity and quality, and how this diversity is affected bymanagement practices. Soil quality can greatly impact land use,sustainability, and productivity. Soil microbia include bacteria,actinomycetes, fungi, algae, viruses, and protozoa, whereas themesofauna include the enchytraeids, nematodes, mites, andspringtails. These serve as sources and sinks of nutrients in allecosystems and play crucial roles in soil formation, residuedecomposition, nutrient cycling, toxicity removal, and biologicalcontrol. Agricultural practices such as reducing tillage, using organicfertilizers, and increasing crop diversity (through rotation, polyculture, orintercropping) can restore soil resilience and protect or promotebelowground biodiversity. Soil microorganisms are highly sensitive todisturbances, such as those introduced by agriculture, and maytherefore serve as early warning indicators of changes in soil quality.However, there is no clear relationship between the diversity ofbelowground organisms and benefit to a system, although of the

authors (Chapters One and Two) support the notion that communityand ecosystem stability is inherent in diversity. These chapters stress,however, that far more information is needed in the fields of taxonomyand species and community function before the interrelationship ofbelowground biodiversity and soil quality and productivity can beelucidated.

These chapters seek to summarize known information on theinterrelationships between underground biodiversity and agriculturalproductivity by addressing the following questions.

1). What is known about the diversity, abundance, and ecologicalfunction of the most important groups of microbes and mesofauna inwild and agricultural soils?What impacts do various agricultural management practices have onthe diversity of soil microbes and mesofauna, and, conversely domanagement-induced changes in belowground diversity impact soilquality and productivity?What management practices promote conservation or enhancementof belowground biodiversity?What are the information gaps that limit our understanding of theinterrelationships between belowground diversity and agriculturalproductivity?

Coverage: Global

Topics: soil biodiversity

The next two chapters focus on the structure and nature ofagroecosystems, how they impact the diversity of insects, and howthese can be harnessed for pest management. Chapter 4 (Petr Staryand Keith S. Pike) covers the uses of insect natural enemies (parasitesand predators) and promotion of their diversity in agroecosystems.Chapter Five (Miguel A. Altieri & Clara I. Nicholls) describes thestructure of agroecosystems and its relationship to the patterns andfunction of insect and plant diversity within them. The authors arguethat simplification of biodiversity inherent in agricultural systemspromotes pest populations and discourages natural enemies. Theseconditions can be ameliorated by temporal and spatial cropdiversification, conservation of adjacent wild biodiversity (harbouringalternate hosts or prey and nectar and pollen sources), use ofrepellent, attractant, or trap plants, use of chemical attractants,introduction or adaptation of biocontrol agents, and modification ofpesticide use, tillage, and mowing patterns. Some of the constraints tonatural enemy use are lack of sufficient taxonomic and ecologicalinformation and the need to assess and modify their use under a

daunting array of geographic, climatic, and agroecologicalconditions.

The chapters attempt to outline the conditions that promote theefficacy of natural enemies in pest management in agroecosystemsby focusing on these key questions:

1) How is agroecosystem heterogeneity (diversity in time andspace) related to the diversity and function of naturalenemies?

2) How do various agricultural practices affect natural pestcontrol?

3) What interventions exist to conserve, promote, and augmentnatural enemies in agroecosystems?

Coverage: Global

Topics: biodiversity that mitigates pests and diseases as

# 20 Cordeiro, A. and B. de Mello. N.D. Recovering Local Maize inBrazil, submission of the Brazilian Government to agrobiodiversity casestudies, Convention on Biological Diversity. Available on old CBDwebsite: http://216.95.224.234/agro/CaseStudies.html

The loss of genetic diversity in food crops as a serious threat toagricultural development in Brazil. The negative consequences oflegislation on patenting life on a community effort to develop farmers’self-sufficient and good quality maize varieties. A project wasundertaken to encourage farmer production of maize seed, based onthe reintroduction of local varieties, as the NGOs of the AlternativeTechnologies Project (PTA), had found that a few farmers who were stillmaintaining local varieties, and getting satisfactory yields despite theirpoor production conditions. A series of training courses were initiatedfor technicians of the PTA network to discuss the potential andlimitations of promoting the use of local varieties. Valorization of localvarieties and farmer’s participation were the main principles to guideany search for solutions to the problem of seed dependency. The finalobjective was that farmers produce their own seed. For this, it wasnecessary to substitute hybrids with open-pollinated varies. With agreater knowledge about the different varieties and better informationabout how to work with them, farmers can make their own choicesand organize seed production at the community or individual level.Supported by the NGOs of the PTA (Alternative Technologies Project),the experience shed light on the possibility of innovation in plantbreeding, in such a way that farmers, technical support people andplant breeders work together.

Topics: plant genetic resources, landraces

Coverage: Brazil

case study from: Brazil

# 21 Costanza, R., R. d’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B.Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R.V. O’Neill. J. Paruelo, R.G. Raskin, P.Sutton, M. Van den Belt. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystemservices and natural capital. Nature 387:253-260.

The services of ecological systems and the natural capital stocks thatproduce them are critical to the functioning of the Earth’s life-supportsystem. They contribute to human welfare, both directly and indirectly,and therefore represent part of the total economic value of theplanet. The paper undertakes to estimate the current economic valueof 17 ecosystem services for 16 biomes, based on published studiesand a few original calculations. For the entire biosphere, the value(most of which is not yet valued by the market) is estimated to be inthe range of US$16-54 trillion per year, with an average of US33 trillionper year, at a minimum. In contrast, gross national product total isaround US$18 trillion per year.

The ecosystem goods and services valuated in this publication are (inorder of valuation, most to least): nutrient recycling, cultural, wastetreatment, disturbance regulation, water supply, food production, gasregulation, water regulation, recreation, raw materials, climateregulation, erosion control and sediment retention, biological control,refugia, pollination, genetic resources, and soil formation.

Coverage: global

Topics: ecosystem services, genetic resources, pollination, biodiversitythat mitigates pests and diseases, soil erosion.

# 22 Crane, E. and P. Walker. 1984. Pollination Directory for WorldCrops. International Bee Research Association, Bucks, England.

Most pollination research has been devoted to crops grown intemperate zones. The pollination requirements of many tropical cropscan often only be guessed at. Few comprehensive books have beenpublished as easy reference material on the pollination of crops,worldwide, and it has not been easy for growers, agronomists or othersto find out about crop dependence on pollination. This book and theFree book attempt to fill this gap. This small book provides informationon more than 400 crop plants. The entry for each plant provides briefdetails that will be enough for many users and also gives reference to

200 publications on which material in the directory is based.

Coverage: Global

Topics: pollination.

# 23 Cromwell, E. 1999. Agriculture, biodiversity and livelihoods: issuesand entry points. Overseas Development Institute, London. Availableon the Internet at: http://www.ukabc.org/abc.htm

This report was produced for the UK’s Department for InternationalDevelopment (DFID), to improve internal understanding and generatea consistent and coherent approach to biodiversity in DFID. The reporttakes agrobiodiversity to “encompasses the variety and variability ofplants, animals and micro-organisms at genetic, species andecosystem level which are necessary to sustain key functions in theagro-ecosystem, its structures and processes for, and in support of foodproduction and food security”. It notes that millions of farmers aroundthe world use, manage and develop agricultural biodiversity onpractical, daily basis, while the governance of its conservation,sustainable use and benefit-sharing is determined at an internationallevel by a number of agreements. Of these, the Convention onBiological Diversity, the International Undertaking on Plant GeneticResources for Food and Agriculture and the WTO/TRIPs agreement arediscussed.

Three main functions of agricultural biodiversity are identified:sustainable production of food, biological support to production, andecological services. The features of agricultural diversity whichdistinguish it from other components of biodiversity are that:agricultural biodiversity is actively managed by farmers manycomponents of agricultural biodiversity would not survive without thishuman interference; indigenous knowledge and culture are integralparts of agricultural biodiversity management; and manyeconomically important farming systems are based on ‘alien’ cropspecies introduced from elsewhere. This creates a very greatinterdependence between countries for the genetic resources onwhich our food systems are based; as regards crop diversity, diversitywithin species is at least as important as diversity between species;because of the degree of human management of agriculturalbiodiversity, its conservation in production systems is inherently linked tosustainable use – making preservation through protected areas is ofless relevance; but nonetheless in industrial-type agricultural systems,much biodiversity is now held ex-situ in gene banks or breeders’materials rather than on-farm.

Farmers in both more ‘traditional’ and more ‘industrial’ agriculturalsystems rely on using agricultural biodiversity as an integral part of theirproduction strategies. In more industrial systems, crop diversity may belower on=farm because – IF the necessary supporting infrastructure is inplace – it can be stored (in gene banks) and manipulated (by plantbreeders) off-farm. Non-crop agricultural biodiversity may remainsignificant on-farm and very important for biological support andecological buffering. In more traditional systems, farmers activelymanage agricultural biodiversity on-farm in order to improveproductivity and maintain sustainability; and adopt to changing needsand circumstances and the need is to enable them to continue to dothis. Give that global food security depends significantly on productionin more industrial agriculture, it is relevant to note the importantcontribution of agricultural biodiversity to global food production aswell as to sustainable livelihoods in more traditional agricultural systems.

The report notes that for the reasons outlined above, it is inappropriateto promote large-scale abandonment of biodiverse agriculture and tomarginalize it in intensive production systems. The challenge is tocreate a new enabling environment that makes returns to themaintenance o agricultural biodiversity more sustainable and moreaccurately reflect agricultural biodiversity’s true value to the livelihoodsof different stakeholders.

The report seeks to identify economic incentives, institutional andpolicy barriers that currently exist against using agricultural biodiversitysustainably, by correcting the pull in policy, research, andimplementation towards the globalisation of the industrial-typeagriculture model. Specific interventions on local national andinternational levels are explored.

Coverage: global

Case studies or examples from: Kenya, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Peru,Vietnam, Philippines, Columbia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, El SalvadorTopics: incentives measures, agrobiodiversity concepts, traditionalagriculture, industrial agriculture, plant genetic resources, ecosystemservices, seed fairs, In International Undertaking on Plant GeneticResources, enabling environments.

# 24 Crucible II Group. 1999. Seeding Solutions. volume 1. Policyoptions for genetic resources: People, plants, and Patents revisited.Copublished by: the International Development Research Centre, theInternational Plant Genetic Resources Institute, and the DagHammarskjold Foundation. 121pp.

In 1994, a diverse group of people, drawn from the North and the

South, from private and public sectors and from NGOs began to meetand discuss in issues related to the conservation and enhancement ofplant genetic resources. They together published “People Plants andPatents”, a book that summarised the major issues related to ownershipconservation and exchange of plant germplasm. The group hascontinued to meet, as a “highly diverse gathering at individuals whopassionately and respectively disagree on intellectual property” andhave produced this volume as an update on the range of discussionswhich have continued over several years. In spit of its diversity, thegroup has achieved a remarkable degree of consensus on particularrecommendations.This first volume has two sections. The first provides a wider context forunderstanding the intellectual property and biodiversity debate. Theissue of loss of biological and cultural data is outlined, along withincreased recognition for the role of farmers and indigenous people inconserving, developing and using biological diversity. It also examinesthe changing roles of public and private sector agricultural research.

The second section of part one deals with ‘Changes in molecularbioscience’. We know that biological knowledge is expanding rapid,and scientific and technical breakthroughs at the molecular level arenot only changing the practice and interpretation of science, they alsohave profound implications for society. Among the exampleshighlighted in this section are mammalian cloning, advances ingenomics, the engineering of plants that render second generationseeds sterile, advances in drug research and discovery, and artificialhuman chromosomes.

Part two of the book scrutinises three major areas of discussion: whoare the players and what are the for a where biological diversity and IPare being discussed? Over the past five years the internationalcommunity has seen major conventions and legal agreements enterinto force that relate to conservation and use of biological diversityand/or the control, ownership of and access to biological materials.Negotiations on biological diversity and intellectual property are takingplace in multiple fora with overlapping and sometimes contradictoryobjects. However, there is a real danger of losing track of theoverarching them and trends amidst the minutiae of internationalconventions. This section examines the central policy issues in threewide areas: policies related to germplasm access and exchange;policies linked to knowledge conservation and formation; and policiesinvolving innovation management.

Coverage: Global

Topics: plant genetic resources, intellectual property rights, access andbenefit sharing

# 25 Daily, G. C. (ed). 1997. Nature’s Services, Societal Dependenceon Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Covelo, California.

This book was written to address the lack of public appreciation ofsocietal dependence on natural ecosystems. If ecosystems do havevalue such that out livelihoods depends on them, we are surely notappreciating these values: this ignorance is one of the factorsresponsible for human destruction of biosphere. If policy is to beformulated to appreciate these values, they need to be more clearlyspecified. In different chapters, this volume addresses the valuation ofseveral ecosystem services as provided by several biomes – grassland,marine, freshwater and forests – are described.

Coverage: Global

Topics: ecosystem services, soil biodiversity, pollination, biodiversitythat mitigates pests and diseases.

Case studies from: subsistence economies, Gunnison County,Colorado, South Africa fynbos.

# 26 Dalpe, Y. no date. Biodiversity of Mycorrhizal Fungi. Submission ofthe Canadian Government to SBSTTA. Available for download on theCBD website: http://ww.biodiv.org/areas/agro/case-studies.asp

This submission, from the Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centreof Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, reviews information on thebiodiversity of mycorrhizal fungi. It notes that only in the last fewdecades have botanists and mycologists realised that most terrestrialplants live in symbiosis with soil fungi. Among the types of mycorrizaeobserved in nature, one which is found on the vast majority ofcultivated plants, and 85% of all herbaceous plants, is arbuscularmycorrhiza. This fungi is found under all climates and in all ecosystems,irregardless of the type of soil, vegetation or growing conditions. Thesymbiotic relationship between the two, in which the fungi provides theplant with greater access to water and soil minerals for its nutrition,while the plant provides the fungi with sugars, amino acids andvitamins essential to its growth, is probably millions of years old.

Given that the majority of cultivated plants used for human and animalfood purposes are colonized by mycorrhizae, this symbiosis deserves tobe better utilised by agriculture, selecting the best plant-funguscombinations. The fact that colonised plants are better able to obtaintheir nourishment in the soil and resist environmental stresses givesfungal symbionts a biofertilising and crop protection role. This shouldlead to healthier cropping systems and to reducing the use of

chemical inputs (pesticides and fertilizers) while ensuring cropprofitability and environmental quality. The Eastern Cereal and OilseedResearch Centre of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada is undertakenan inventory of indigenous and agricultural soils, descriptions of fungi,and computerized taxonomic documents. Their reference collection isthe only one in Canada available to industry partners, governmentagencies, universities, and private producers, and supplies servicesrelating to production and identification of strains and consultationservices.

Topics: Soil biodiversity, sustainable agriculture

Coverage: Canada, Senegal, Burkina Faso

# 27 Dias, B.S.F., A. Raw and V. Imperatri-fonseca. 199. INTERNATIONALPOLINATORS. Report on the Recommendations of the Workshop on theConservation and Sustainable Use of Pollinators in Agriculture withEmphasis on Bee Conservation. Brazilian Ministry of the Environment,Brasilia.

The emergence of a serious and widespread disease has made it clearthat native pollinators need to be protected and sustainably managedfor the pollination service they can provide and that agriculturalpractices be designed to incorporate the protection and sustainablemanagement of bee populations. The pollinator crisis exemplifies theintimate relationship existing between the welfare of naturalenvironments and their biodiversity and the needs of sustainableagriculture. As a contribution to the development of the CBD workprogram approved by Decision lll/11 on the “Conservation andSustainable Use of Agricultural Biological Diversity”, which identifiedpollinators as one of the initial priorities, the Brazilian Government heldan international workshop of experts to propose a framework for aninternational initiative on pollinators as a key element in this program.The workshop was attended by 61 scientists from 15 countries and fourinternational organizations (CBD secretariat, FAO, IBRA and ICPBR). Sixgroups of specialists discussed: 1 – Reducing the TaxonomicImpediment on Pollinators, 2- Monitoring the Decline of Pollinators, 3-Identifying the causes of Pollinator Decline, 4 – Quantifying theEconomic Value of Pollinators to Agriculture, 5-Conservation ofPollinator Diversity, and 6- Sustainable Use of Pollinators theRecommendations of the Workshop include a proposal that COP5formally establish an International Pollinators Initiative based on theframework for action contained in this report and request SBSTTA to co-ordinate, with support from the Executive Secretary, the preparation ofa first Global Diversity Outlook Report on Pollinators. The Workshopparticipants also requested that COP5 call for international co-operation to develop the international Pollinators Initiative, and

furthermore, propose the creation of Pollinators Specialist Group withinthe Species Survival Commission of the IUCN. The recommendationsproduced by this workshop are intended to help foster support fromagencies to enhance initiatives on all continents on pollinatorconservation and sustainable use. This should help to mainstream theissue of biodiversity in our society and to direct the conservationmovements to promote the maintenance of biodiversity as an essentialcomponent to ecosystem functioning.

The workshop participants concluded that there is insufficient reliabledata on the reported declines in the numbers of pollinators and theireffects on agriculture, but that the necessary expertise to collect suchdata is available. Furthermore, they agreed that such an effort isviable provided the institutional support is available. However, thedifficulties in obtaining reliable identification of pollinators (especially ofbees), which are vital for the success of both the monitoringprogramme and pollination research, was also stressed. They alsoemphasized that the pollination requirements of relatively few cropsare known. The experts spoke of the need to produce manuals andcatalog and agreed that the creation of websites with databases ofspecialists, publications and reports and information on the pollinationrequirements of crops and on their pollinators is vital and that successof the proposed actions will be greatly enhanced with publicawareness of the problem. The spread of successful pollinators forsome cultures should be regulated, in order to avoid their introductionin areas outside their natural distribution and avoid competition withlocal pollinators.

The 43 proposals for action of coming from this workshop are varied,and many are concerned with the collection of reliable informationand its dissemination. The predominance of these two subjectsdemonstrates the participants’ desire to have access to standardizedextra data. Some of this information already exists but is not reallyavailable, while much additional data need to be collected. Aninternational training program was suggested, with standardizedmethodology and well-defined goals in order to create a worldwidenetwork of experts capable to develop appropriate actions for theconservation and sustainable use of local pollinator diversity.

Topics: pollination

Coverage: Global

# 28 Dubois. 1998. Promotion of Biodiversity Conservation with Coffeelandscapes. available on old CBD website:http://216.95.224.234/agro/CaseStudies.html

This document reports on the perspective of the GEF- funded “EISPromotion of Biodiversity Conservation with Coffee Landscapes”project. The document notes that coffee production in Latin Americaevolved from a sun crop to shade-dominated farming system undertraditional systems of management. It more recently has beensubjected to forces driving it to, again, a sun crop, from donors such asUSAID who have been convinced that the new system would reducethe spread of a fungal disease. The greatest rates of adoption of thenew system have been in Colombia and Costa Rica.

There are, however, high biodiversity levels of native and migratory birdspecies in traditional coffee. In El Salvador, it has been noted that only2% of the forest remains intact, and productive, human-alteredlandscapes need to contribute to promoting biodiversity. 9% of ElSalvador is under coffee cultivation, of which some 95% is under shadecultivation systems. The project proposes to increase the extent ofcoffee plantations under biodiversity-friendly shade regimes, supportsmarketing and certification, and to establish a biological corridor ofshade coffee plantation between two protected areas. Thedocument reports on outcomes in a series of bullet points, which aredifficult to interpret….

Topics: certification and marketing, migration corridors in agriculturalland

Coverage: El Salvador

Includes case study from: El Salvador

# 29 Elliot, L.F. 1997. Microbial Biodiversity and Grass CroppingSystems. Keynote address to the XVIII international GrasslandCongress, and case study submission of the Canadian government tothe Convention on Biological Diversity. Available on the CBD webpageat: http://www.biodiv.org/areas/agro/case-studies.asp

Grass cropping in a rotation and use of no-till seeding appear to bemore important components for developing sustainable croppingsystems. Grass cropping and no-till seeding improve soil organicmatter content, increase the soil microbial biomass, increaseearthworm numbers, likely cause a buildup of fungivorousmicroarthropods and nematodes, and greatly increases the resistanceof soil to erodibility. Grasses in the rotation usually result in a largerotational effect. All of these factors point to beneficial effects on soilbiodiversity. It is unlikely that soil biodiversity is increased but more likelythat the beneficial portions of the diverse populations are encouraged.Methods for measuring the many components of soil biodiversity on atemporal basis are unavailable. Combinations of microbial biomass,

enzyme activity, genetic probes and markers, measurement of MRNAand more precise methods for separating individual micro andmesofaunal groups are potential approaches. In this mannerprocedures may be developed to follow key groups as indicatorshealthy been particularly useful. Earthworm counts appear to be asensitive indicator to the biodiversity of an agricultural system.

More studies are needed regarding tillage and cropping interactionsas they affect the microflora, microfauna, mesofauna andmacrofauna. Tillage reduces the soil organic matter content, themicrobial biomass content, earthworm numbers, and generally greatlyincreases soil susceptibility to erosion. Tillage disrupts micro andmesofaunal relationships but results are not clear at this time. Itappears that protecting soil from the negative impacts of tillage isessential for preserving soil biodiversity and is an important componentof sustainable cropping systems. Being able to define components ofsoil biodiversity that promote soil health and sustainable croppingsystems are very important to users and policymakers. This knowledgewill provide a basis for appropriate decisions based on fact.

Topics: sustainable agriculture, soil biodiversity

Coverage: Canada, temperate zones

# 30 Enriquez, L. 2001. Cuba’s New Agricultural revolution: TheTransformation of Food Crop Production in Contemporary Cuba. FoodFirst, California, USA. Available at:http://www.foodfirst.org/pubs/devreps/dr14.html

The first half of the1990s witnessed the start of a major transformation ofCuban agriculture, from an emphasis of large state farms to locallybased concerns; from export-oriented production to food cropproduction; from high technology to alternative technologies. Thisessay takes a look at the transformation that is currently underway inCuban agriculture and how-and whether a number of dilemmasproduced by Cuba’s classical model of development are beingaddressed.

Coverage: Cuba

Agroecosystem focus: General

Topics: alternative technologies

# 31 Faeth, P., ed. 1993. Agricultural Policy and Sustainability: CaseStudies from India, Chile, the Philippines and the United States. WorldResources Institute, Washington, DC. 114pp.

As unsustainable agricultural practices continues to be usedthroughout the world. The symptoms of salinisation, erosion, waterpollution, etc, become more evident. At the same time, hungeralready a daily reality for the world’s poorest, is growing. Conventionaleconomic analysis obscures the degradation of the natural resourcebase that supports agriculture. Changes in the productivity of naturalresources simply are not taken into account. Until now, economicresearch on agriculture has failed measure sustainability and to revealhow policies biased in favor of conventional farming methods erodethe resource base.

This volume is an effort on the part of the World Resources institute to fillthis gap by using natural resource accounting methods to get aclearer picture of the relationship between farm policies andsustainability. The book addresses how farm policy affect theproduction choices that farmers make, and how those choices affectenvironmental and human health. By quantifying the environmentalimpacts of various combinations of cropping systems and farm policies.The authors demonstrate that farm policy is stacked against resource-conserving farming methods in all but one of the six areas studies. Theyfind that the real costs of conventional farming methods aremiscalculated in both the developing world and the United States.

To encourage the transition to resource-conserving agriculturalmethods that is in every nation’s long term interest, the authorsrecommend that governments reform their agricultural institutions andpolicies and improve the tools for monitoring and evaluation policyperformance. Three key recommendations were:

• Governments should eliminate subsides that encourage thedegradation of depletion of natural resources for instance, theelectricity subsides that lead to groundwater depletion in India andthe pesticide subsides that make unhealthy practices profitable inthe Philippines.

• To reduce both fiscal costs and environmental damages, industrialcountries should revise their farm income-support programs, tyingsupport to need and to stewardship of the natural resource base,not to commodity production.

• Governments should revise the agricultural economic indicatorsreported in official statistics, making them relate the depletion,depreciation and degradation of natural resources.

Coverage: Global

Topics: sustainable agriculture, agricultural policy indicators.

Case studies or examples from: India, Chile, the Philippines and theUnited States.

# 32 FAO 2001. The Economics of Soil Productivity in Sub-Sahara Africa.Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome, 2001.

Abstract: The problem of loss of soil productivity is a complexphenomenon yet most ecological studies focus on soil erosion ornutrient depletion in isolation and economic analyses focus onassessments of various conservation technologies or the incentives forfertilizer use. This book highlights how economics can positively impactthe problem of degradation of soil productivity (soil structure, waterholding capacity, nutrient exchange capacity, and acidity) as,previously. The role of economics in soil productivity at farm, nationaland international levels has often been over looked.

At the farm level, this book rethinks the factors of soil fertility thataccount for its sustainable use and the implications of economicanalyses of these factors. Until recently, soil degradation focused onerosion and the most appropriate solutions for reducing environmentaldamage such as physical structures for conservation (e.g. stone lines,terracing, drainage channels). However, poor soil managementpractice often is cited as the root cause of soil degradation rather thanerosion itself. In this case, participatory techniques to transmitinformation concerning improved soil management would be a moreappropriate conservation measure. The effect of the economicanalyses of the different approaches can be far-reaching.

Economic considerations that are recommended:

• Economic analysis of risk factors that inhibit input use; improvedaccess t6o off-farm income to finance on-farm investments; andthe profitability of various soil conservation techniques;

• Financial and economic analyses of farming cooperatives toestablish the attractiveness of collective action to identifyperceived net benefits to individual stakeholders. These netbenefits weigh the contribution made by individuals to the commoneffort against their share of the resulting benefits.

Potential economic applications to soil productivity problems:Assessing farm level incentives; Screening promising techniques

through an analysis of incorporating depletion into productioncosts/farm budgets; Farm level sustainability indicators non-marketvaluation techniques.

At the macro-economic policy even the following are noted to affectnatural resource management (including soil productivity): expansivefiscal and monetary policies (resulting in economic stability anddiscouraging farm-level investment in improved soil management),high inflation, high interest rates, overvalued exchange rates, highdebt service ratios, protectionism (leading to over use of land).

Economic considerations that are recommended:

Sustainable indicators of a more general nature for use at farming,community and catchment levels. A variety of indicators are useful inraising decision-makers’ awareness and in promoting improved soilmanagement at all levels. Economic analysis can help screen andevaluate promising farming systems and soil management techniques.

Potential economic applications to soil productivity problems:Macro-economic policy linkages through an economic analysis

of estimating degradation damages; Green accounting; Sustainabilityindicators.

At the international level, interventions from other countries may holdas long as soil degradation imposes regional or global costs, or as longas there are global benefits from improving soil productivity. Costs atthe international level include:• Loss of crop/livestock production leading to eco-refugee problems

and famine;• Dietary deficiencies and diseases requiring international

interventions;• Flooding, soil transport and transboundary sedimentation problems

leading to reduced crop yields• Loss of significant soil microbe and earthworm biodiversity (e.g.

penicillin, streptomycin);• Waste accumulation of global proportions; greenhouse gas

releases and global warming linkage as organic matter is removed.

Economic considerations that are recommended:

• Individual nations will not take into account global benefitsstemming from soil management assistance unless they cancapture a share of these benefits. International transfers (e.g.carbon credits) can provide countries with incentives to devotemore resources to soil productivity.

• A relatively minor deterioration in soil productivity may result incatastrophic events (e.g. famine, eco-refugee displacement).Such a risk provides an incentive for the international community to

apply the precautionary principle, acting sooner rather that later toprevent such an occurrence.

Potential economic applications to soil productivity problems:International transfers through an economic analysis of

extended cost-benefit analysis; use of the precautionary principle.

Coverage: Sub-Saharan Africa (with global examples)

Agroecosystem focus: Sub-Saharan agroecosystems

Contains examples or case studies (in italics) from: Sub-Saharan Africaincluding as Niger, Nigeria, Sudan, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Lesotho,Kenya, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, South Africa, Zimbabwe,Morocco as well as Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Haiti, Costa Rica,Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama, Ecuador,Indonesia, Nepal and India.

Topics: farm level, national and global economic considerations forsustainable soil fertility; economic considerations, recommendations.

# 33 Free, J.B. 1993 Insect Pollination of Crops. 2nd edition, AcademicPress New York.

The significance of insect pollinators in maximising the yield ofnumerous crop plants continues to be of great importance. Ourknowledge of this subject has advanced considerably in recent years,and this updated version of Free’s 1970 reference is probably the mostcomplete compendium of information on crop pollinators.(Unfortunately, it is presently out of print). In the interim between thetwo editions, much more work has been carried out in the tropics,which is now included in the second edition.

Crops are presented in alphabetical order of their families, as specieswith similar flowers often share similar pollination of a crop speciesvaries greatly with locality and with cultivar, and the author has tried toinclude as much of this localised variability as possible. The authorpoints out that breeders of insect pollinated crops should always assurethat the quality and quantity of pollen and nectar produced willattract sufficient pollinators even when competitive sources arenearby.

# 34 Government of Brazil. N.D. Brazil’s fantastic growth in no-till sinceEco-92. Submission of the Brazilian Government to agrobiodiversitycase studies, Convention on Biological Diversity. available on old CBDwebsite: http://216.95.224.234/agro/CaseStudies.html

This four page brochure describes a farmer-led technologicalrevolution in Brazil, beginning in 1972, to promote no-till farmingtechniques that have been adopted on over six million hectares. Thebrochure notes that a significant factor in the transfer of thistechnology has been the unique system of “Friends of the soil” clubs,joined together in regional associations and a national federation. Intheir local clubs, farmers swap experiences and hold technical events.

Coverage: Brazil

Topics: conservation tillage

Case studies or examples from: Brazil.

# 35 Government of Brazil. 1994. Brazil: The Management ofAgriculture. Rural Development, and Natural Resources. Document ofthe World Bank. Report No 11783-Br. In two volumes. (This paper isavailable at http://www-wds.worldbank.org/

This report presented in two volumes. The first volume is a detailedsummary of findings and conclusions of the work on agriculture, ruraldevelopment and natural resource policy in Brazil. The second volumeassembles the background papers prepared as part of the mentionedstudy. The first volume is meant for policymakers and the second maybe of interest to their advisers and to the academic community.

This study surveys and analyses the policies that the government hasadopted towards agriculture and natural resources management inBrazil. It covers the following issues:1. patterns of agricultural growth and recent policy adjustments,2. foreign trade regime and agricultural price policies;3. sugar/ethanol policy;4. public finance;5. agricultural research and extension;6. rural credit;7. land markets and land ownership;8. small farm agriculture, rural development, and social services for

the rural poor;9. conservation, forestry and biodiversity.

This study recognises the abundance of biodiversity and diverseecosystems in Brazil, and the ecological benefits of standing forestsand of biodiversity. It presents the problems related to land use andresource degradation, and identifies the policy environment as one ofthe main causes of the agricultural expansion into forest.

This report also recognises that Brazil has undertaken major institutional

and economic reforms many in agricultural and natural resourcemanagement and documents a large number of interventions used bythe government to manage agriculture, rural development and use ofnatural resources. However, conservation efforts have beenconcentrated in certain regions. For instance about 75% of the land inprotected areas in Brazil is located in the Amazon region. The studyconcludes that Brazil must develop a conservation strategy that takesinto account all the major biomes of the country.The strategy should include a research agenda to increase the limitedknowledge of plant and animal species and their inches in Brazil’svaried ecosystems.

This study addresses policy measures aimed at conserving biodiversity,such as reducing subsidised credits to livestock sector and liberalisingtrade in agricultural products, thereby increasing the profitability offarming in existing agricultural areas relative to frontier areas. Itsuggests modifications in policies to achieve vigorous growth inagriculture, reduction in rural poverty and sustainable use of naturalresources. It also makes specific recommendation of protected areas,and taxation of land in native forests and cleared areas.

Topics: Agricultural management, Rural development, Naturalresources, Poverty mitigation, Governmental policies Trade policies,Natural resource policies, policy reform, Sugar/ethanol policy, landdegradation, Land markets, Rural credit.

Coverage: Brazil

# 36 GTZ. 2000. Support of the Informal Seed Sector. DeutscheGesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH incollaboration with the Centre for Genetic Resources, The Netherlands(CGN).

This small booklet aims to identify the conceptual and strategicbackground for support to the informal seed sector within theframework of sustainable seed supply systems and developmentcooperation. It concentrates on the informal seed sector and itscomplementarity and interface with the formal sector, since thisimportant area has been neglected in the past. The case for theimportance of local seed security for food production and sustainableagriculture is made. The vital contribution of the informal seed sectorto ensuring food security for the rural population is emphasised.Additionally, the booklet shos that support for the informal seed sectorcontributes to in situ management of agrobiodiversity, and thereby tothe implementation of Agenda 21 of the UN Conference onEnvironment and Development (UNCED) and of the Convention onBiological Diversity (CBD).

Coverage: global

Topics: agricultural genetic resources

# 37 IPGRI. 1999. Key questions for decision-makers. Protection ofplant varieties under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects ofIntellectual Property Rights. Decision Tools, October 1999. InternationalPlant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.

This small booklet is part of an on-going body of work that IPGRI hopeswill assist decision makers with the complex task of discerning the manyissues of relevance to the conservation and management of plantgenetic resources and devising a coherent and consistent policy andlegislative response. The booklet is intended as a tool to helpunderstand implementation options under Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPSagreement and their potential implications for each countries’objectives relevant to plant genetic resources.

Coverage: GlobalTopics: agricultural genetic resources

# 38 Jarvis, D.I.L. Meyer, H. Klemik, L. Guarino, M. Smale, A.H.D. Brown,M. Sadiki, B. Sthapit and T. Hodgkin. 2000. A Training Guide fro In SituConservation On-farm. Version 1. International Plant GeneticResources Institute, Italy. Available from:http://www.ipgri.org/publications

This is a practical manual intended for national programmes interestedin supporting in situ conservation of agricultural biodiversity maintainedon-farm by farmers. It was written to provide a range of actors,including the Ministries of Agriculture and the Environment, universities,research and extension institutions, non-government organizations(NGOs) and community based groups, with a comprehensive view offactors involved in designing and implementing a programme tosupport the in-situ conservation of crop genetic diversity on-farm.Recognising the complexity of in-situ conservation, the guide is gearedto give national programmes basic technical skills and tolls to buildinstitutional capacity and partnerships to implement an on-farmconservation programme. It discusses the information necessary andthe practical steps for the implementation of on-farm conservation, aswell as the importance of such an initiative. Seed systems andinstitutional frameworks for the implementation of on-farmconservation initiatives are described. The importance of participatoryapproaches and relevant techniques are outlined. The reader is leadthrough the steps of acquiring information to develop an action plan,and linking actions to benefits for local farmers. The role of policy, and

our present lack of understanding of the effects of policy on-farmconservation, is described.

Topics: on-farm conservation, plant genetic resources

Coverage: global

Case studies or examples from: Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Columbia,China, Denmark, Ethiopia, Hungary, India, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal,Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Syria, Tanzania, Turkey, Vietnam.

# 39 Jones, R. and P. Munn, eds. 1999. Hab9tat Management for Beesand Wasps. International Bee Research Association, Cardiff, UK. 38pp.can be ordered from: http:///www.cf.ac.uk/ibra.

This booklet is a guide for those concerned with managing landscapesto conserve bee and wasp populations, or using bees and wasps asbio-indicators. It indicates habitat requirements of British bees andwasps, describes the planning, implementing and reporting of a sitesurvey, and discuss UK priorities and funding for conservation of nativebees and wasps.

Coverage: United Kingdom

Topics: pollination, habitat management

# 40 Kirkwood, R.C. 1997. Biodiversity and Conservation in Agriculture.Proceedings of an International Symposium held at the Stakis BrightonMetropole Hotel 17 November 1997, British Crop Protection CouncilSymposium Proceedings No. 69.

(can be ordered from British Crop; Protection Council, tel: +44(0) 118934 2727, publications@bpcp.or http://www.bcpc.org)

This symposium provides a British contribution to the topic ofagrobiodiversity conservation. As is presently receiving muchrecognition, agriculture is important to biodiversity because farmland issuch an important habitat. The papers presented in this volumeconsiders the threats attributable to farming practices to mammals,ground beetles, invasive weeds and farmland birds. The effects ofbiodiversity appear to be most marked within the center of the fieldwith greater biodiversity found around the field margins. Groundbeetle diversity in farmland is intermediate between the best and worstof that found in natural habitats, while farmland bird populationsappear to decreasing.

Several papers highlight the importance of retaining landscapefeatures, especially hedgerows. Varied cropping patterns, untreatedfield margins, conservation headlands, and alternatives to pesticideuse are advocated. The importance of retaining a mosaic ofnatural/semi-natural habitats including woodland copses, hedges,ditches, ponds and field corners is emphasised.

Appropriate government policies to benefit farmland wildlife arediscussed.

Case studies from: United Kingdom

# 41 Lesser, W. & S. Kyle. 1996. Policy Considerations along theInterface between Biodiversity and Agriculture Pp. 31-51 in: Srivastava,J., N.J.H. Smith and D. Forno, eds. 1996. Biodiversity and AgriculturalIntensification: Partners for Development and Conservation.Environmentally Sustainable Development Studies and MonographSeries No.11. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.

The paper identifies the effect of international agreements andnational economic policies on conservation and use of geneticresources in agriculture. It is asserted that an understanding ofincentives structures at the local level is essential if biodiversity is to beconserved and managed more wisely. Thus, the emphasis is onunderstand how national and multinational policies apply at the locallevel. The paper examines price and land use relationships,macroeconomic policies, input taxes and subsidies, supply restrictions,land us policies on the conservation of biodiversity. Researchparadigms such as those that influence the international agriculturalresearch centers, are examined for their potential impacts onbiodiversity. The benefits of involvement of local communities in policydevelopment are stressed. Specific policy guides corresponding to thetopics above are given.

Sovereign rights to genetic resources are discussed at length, includingthe FAO International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, accesslegislation, Farmer’s Rights. Specific policy issues and knowledge gapsin relation to genetic resources are identified. International tradeagreements in relation to the conservation of biodiversity and otherenvironmental safeguards are dealt with, including the handling ofagricultural issues under GATT, NAFTA and the WTO.

Intellectual property rights and other forms of protection of informationare considered. The difficulty of applying these to protect traditionalknowledge, and the lack of a clear mechanism or link to conservationis discussed. The authors assert that while intellectual property rightsand the genetic uniformity demanded by plant breeders’ rights may

contribute to the declining use of traditional varieties; they have notbeen a major factor. The importance of developing a new system ofaccess and rights in relation to tradition varieties and breeds, wildpopulations, and near-relatives of crops and livestock is stressed.

Coverage: Global

Topics: plant genetic resources, national economic policies,international agreements, incentive structure, price and land userelationships, macroeconomic policies, input taxes and subsidies,supply restrictions, land use policies, agricultural research, localcommunity involvement, access legislation, International Undertakingon Plant Genetic Resources, international trade agreements.

Case studies or examples from: Philippines, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ethiopia.

# 42 Long, R.F., A. Corbett, C. Lamb, C. Reberg-Horton, J. Chandleerand M. Stimman. 1998. Beneficial insects move from flowering plants tonearby crops. California Agriculture September-October 1998. Pp.23-26.

Marketing studies in California demonstrated that lady beetles,lacewings, syrphid flies and parasitic wasps fed on nectar or pollenprovided by borders of flowering plants around farms: many insectsmoved 250 feet into adjacent field crops. These beneficial insects fedon flowering cover crops in orchard and moved 6 feet high in the treecanopy and 100 feet away from the treated area. The use of nectaror pollen by beneficial insects helps them survive and reproduce.Planting flowering plants and perennial grasses around farms may leadto better biological control in nearby crops.

Coverage: United States

Topics: natural pest control, sustainable agriculture

Case studies or examples from: United States.

# 43 Matheson, A., ed. 1994. Forage for bees in an agriculturallandscape. International Bee Research Association, Cardiff, U.K.

Land use and the conservation of insects are subjects of concern inmany areas of the world; not only in the much-discussed tropicalrainforests, but also in industrialized countries. In the UK andcontinental Europe, agriculture dominates much of the landscape, soagricultural practice has a significant effect on habitats for insects,including bees. There are large areas of arable land in Europe, muchof which is unfavourable to bees; also the extent of semi-natural

habitats has declined, affecting bee populations.

Current changes in agricultural policy, especially those attempting toaddress the problem of overproduction of food, stand to have asignificant impact on both wild bees and managed honey bees. Thisvolume is intended to stimulate discussion of the need to work for beeconservation, and of the opportunities that have been created bycurrent agricultural policies. It is also important that agriculture industryprofessionals to consider and adopt land management strategies thatwill promote the availability of habitats and food sources for bees.

Contributors to this volume looked at the present state of UK andEuropean agricultural policy, especially as it affects set-asideprogrammes. Then the papers look at what has happened to nectarand pollen sources available to bees in Britain over the last 45 to 50years, and what the current status is of nectar sources.

Coverage: UK and Europe

Topics: pollination, bee conservation, ecosystem services

# 44 Matheson, A., A. L. Buchmann. C. O. Toole, P. Westrich and I. H.Williams. 1996. The Conservation of Bees. Academic Press, London,Linnean Society of London and International Bee Research Association– IBRA, 252p. Press, Washington DC.

Bees form a vital part of many natural and farmed landscapes all overthe world both as pollinators and as part of the wider insectcommunity. But everywhere bees are under pressure, from the directimpact of pesticides in the environment, as well as the indirect effectsof habitat alteration and destruction.

This book focuses on a number of important topics in bee biology andconservation in temperate regions of four continents. The varieties ofhabitats needed fir bees to thrive, the essential links and interactionsbetween bees and many plant species, and the current state of beebiodiversity and conservation are dealt with by an international groupof authors.

Coverage: temperate zone

Topics: pollination

# 45 McNeely, J.A and S.J. Scheer. 2001. Common Ground, CommonFuture: How EcoAgriculture Can Help Feed the World and Save WildBiodiversity. IUCN/Future Harvest, Gland, Switzerland. Available on theinternet at: http://www.futureharvest.org.

This report analyses the links between agriculture and biodiversity. Ithighlights the findings of a study that brings together successfulmethods from around the world that are being used to increase foodproduction and save wild species. Such innovative farming and landmanagement techniques are the elements of what the authors see asa new type of agriculture: “ecoagriculture”. Case studies, broughttogether from six continents, demonstrate that while agriculture nowpresents the greatest threat to species diversity, improvements inagriculture through research can reverse this trend and enableagriculture to help conserve wild biodiversity.

The report identifies six key ecoagriculture strategies that can helpfarmers grow the food they need-without destroying the habitats of thewild species that live on or near their land. These are:

Strategy 1: Reduce habitat destruction by increasing agricultureproductivity and sustainability on lands already being farmed.

Strategy 2: Enhance wildlife habitat on farms and establish farmlandcorridors that link uncultivated species.

Strategy 3: Establish protected areas near farming areas, ranch lands,and fisheries.

Strategy 4: Mimic natural habitats by integrating productive perennialplants.

Strategy 6: Modify resource management practices to enhancehabitat quality in and around farmlands.

The research compiled within this report suggests that there are waysof managing the coexistence of wildlife and agriculture, and thatpreviously unrecognized synergies can lead to increased foodproductivity and conservation gains.

Coverage: global

Topics: Sustainable agriculture, wild biodiversity in agriculturallandscapes.

Case studies or examples from: Singapore, United States, China,Philippines, Brazil, Costa Rica, UK, Nepal, Australia, Indonesia, CentralAmerica, Vietnam, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Zambia.

# 46 Mutta, D., Thrupp, L.A. and Simons A. 1998. IntegratingAgrobiodiversity Concerns into National Policies, Plans and Strategies

in Eastern Africa. ACTS (African Centre for Technology Studies), WRI(World Resources Institute) and ICRAF (International Centre forResearch in Agroforestry).

This paper is one of the documents resulting from the Agrobiodiversityworkshop organized by ACTS and WRI during the Second EasternAfrica Sub-regional Forum on Biodiversity, convened November 17-19.1997 at the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF)Nairobi, Kenya.

The paper is a good review of the socio-economic pressures on naturalresources and is discussed in overall trends as well as in separatereviews of each country considered –Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. Appropriate backgroundinformation is also presented. The paper’s topics include:

• A review of the Convention on Biological Diversity’s decisions withreference to agrobiodiversity;

• Definition of agrobiodiversity including a brief overview of thegeneral benefits of agrobiodiversity;

• Status of agrobiodiversity in the region with specific discussions ofthe Eastern Africa centre of origin of crop species (plus a world mapof the Vavilov centres of crop genetic diversity with areas andexamples of originating crops) and a short section on some of theendemic plants to the region;

• Trends in agriculture and agrobiodiversity based on the factorsaffecting agrobiodiversity (causes and processes) includingdemographic pressures, inequality and poverty, perverse foodpolicies, changing food preferences, breakdown of traditionalinstitutions, civil wars and insecurity.

Indications show that modern cash cropping farming systems haslimited the use of agrobiodiversity. Traditional farming systems havenot been mainstreamed in policy and little information existsconcerning traditional knowledge, which further marginalises thisfarming system. Yet, traditional farming systems perform importantfunctions where the modern agricultural productions fail leading tofood insecurity due to drought, pests, loss of income, low quantitiesand variability of food often leading to malnutrition.

Modern cash cropping systems have been effectively propagated bypolicies designed to promote the Green Revolution leading to thecurrent state that in all four countries under review, cash croppinghighly dominates the economies of the region by factoringapproximately 30-50% to GDP, as well as contributing highly toemployment and the export crops to total export earnings. However,these practices originally lead to an increase in crop production

especially in two exotic crop varieties – wheat and rice, yet this wasdone at the expense of diverse traditional agro-ecosystems thuslimiting the wealth of agrobiodiversity at the landscape, ecosystem,species and genetic levels. As Eastern Africa losses its genetic base,the potential for self-sufficiency in food production grows limitedleading to dependency on food aid.

Although there are some efforts to address the loss of agrobiodiversitywithin Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, these are only implied inpolicy documents and programs and have only been largelyineffective due to inadequate financial, legal and institutionalcapacities to design and implement policies that are focused onagrobiodiversity.

Recommendations in this paper to increase agro-biodiversity urge:Awareness raising and training, increased investment in biodiversitymanagement and research, environmental accounting, economicand legal incentives, and local community participation.

Coverage: Eastern Africa, specifically Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda andTanzania

Agroecosystem focus: GeneralContains examples or case studies from: Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda andTanzania

Topics: Country-specific approaches for promoting agrobiodiversitywith reference to the Convention on Biological ‘Diversity, direct androot causes of loss of agrobiodiversity, recommendations for improvinguse of agrobiodiversity.

# 47 OECD. 2001. Environmental Indicators for Agriculture: Methodsand Results. Volume 3. OECD, Paris, France. Available on the internetat: http://www.oecd.org/agr/env/indicators.htm

OECD work on Agri-Environmental Indicators is primarily aimed atpolicy makers and the wider public interested in the development,trends and the use of agri-environmental indicators for policy purposes.The focus of the work is in particular related to indicator definitions,methodologies and calculation of indicators.

Many of the agri-environmental indicators being developed are ofimportance beyond OECD Member countries, for example, on issuescovering soil and water quality, and the use of nutrients, pesticides andwater by agriculture.

The general objectives of OECD work on AEls are intended to:

Provide information on the current state and changes in the conditionsof the environment in agriculture. Assist policy makers to betterunderstand the linkages between the causes and impacts ofagriculture, agricultural policy reform, trade liberalization andenvironmental measures on the environment, and help to guide theirresponses to changes in environmental conditions.Contribute to monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of policiesaddressing agri-environmental concerns and promoting sustainableagriculture, including future looking perspectives of agri-environmentallinkages.

OECD work on AEIs covers four main areas:

1. Agriculture in the broader economic, social and environmentalcontext, setting the Ayes in a broader context by consideringcontextual information and indicators, that is the influence onagri-environmental relationships on economic forces (e.g. farmproduction, employment), societal preferences (e.g. ruralviability), environmental processes (e.g. interaction of agriculturewith biophysical conditions) and land use changes (e.g.agricultural land use). One of the key contextual issues concernsfarm financial resource and their relation to environmentaloutcomes in terms of farm level income and public and privateagri-environmental expenditure.

2. Farm management and the environment, examining therelationship between different farming practices and systemsand their impact on the environment, covering whole farmmanagement practices that encompass overall trends infarming methods, including organic farming, as well as nutrient,pest, soil and irrigation management practices

3. Use of farm inputs and natural resources, tracking trends in theuse of farm inputs, covering nutrients (e.g. fertilizers, manure),pesticides (including risks), and water use intensity, efficiency,stress and the price of water paid by farmers relative to otherusers in the economy.

4. Environmental impacts of agriculture, monitoring the extent ofagriculture’s impact on the environment covering: soil quality,water quality, land conservation, greenhouse gases, biodiversity,wildlife habitats and landscape.

The OECD, through its various studies and activities, is exploring arange of applications for better using indicators for policy purposes,which are summarized on their web page.

# 48 Pagiola, S.,J. Kellenberg, L. Vidaeus and J. Srivastava. 1997.Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Agricultural Development: TowardsGood Practice. World Bank Environment Paper Number 15. Series:Global Overlays Program. The World Bank Washington, D.C.

Agriculture has played a major role in the decline of biodiversity. Itsexpansion and intensification are considered to be majorcontributors to loss of habitat and reductions of biodiversityworldwide. Agricultural landscapes, however, can containconsiderable biodiversity. Biodiversity often plays a crucial role inagricultural production by providing services such as geneticinformation, useful for development of new crop pollination, soilfertility services provided by microorganisms and pest controlservices provided by insects and wildlife. The value of biodiversityservices, however, is not taken into consideration when takingdecisions, such as land use, which affect biodiversity. Thisundervaluation of biodiversity’s services is exacerbated by theeffects of government policies, including both agriculture specificpolicies and broader economy policies.

Mainstreaming biodiversity in agricultural developments meansaddressing strategic elements such as: -recognizing and diagnosingthe causes of biodiversity loss, -reforming economy-wide andsectoral policies, -eliminating the market failures causingundervaluation of biodiversity, -improving available technologies toachieve better management of biological resources andpromotion of biodiversity-friendly agriculture, this should beaccompanied with improvements to extension to ensure that newtechniques, inputs and formation emerged reach farmers.Targeted conservation efforts are needed to complement thebroader responses. These might include protection of particularimportant parts of areas being converted to agriculture,preservation of corridors between remaining habitats, ex-situconservation of particularly variable species and efforts to protectthreatened species in situ.

Mainstreaming biodiversity in agriculture development is constraintby: -lack of information and a generally poor understanding of thenature of effects, -the traditional focus on sectoral production andinstitutional barriers to cross-sectoral coordination, which preventinclusion of biodiversity conservation in agricultural developmentplanning; -lack of proven methods to address biodiversity lossproblems.

The Bank is committed to assist developing countries partners inmainstreaming biodiversity in agricultural development. To deliver

on this commitment the Bank needs to integrate biodiversityconservation as an objective into its operations at the levels ofcountry assistance strategy, agricultural sector review and analysis,and project design and implementation.

The paper seeks to help planners in reconciling agriculturalproduction without damaging the biodiversity that forms the basisof sustainable agriculture. This is done by

1) Reviewing current knowledge on the relationship betweenagriculture and biodiversity

2) Analyzing the factors that have exacerbate the conflictbetween the two and prevented complementarities from beingexploited

3) Proposing ways in which conflicts can be reduced andcomplementarities enhanced.

The paper addresses four main questions:

1) What impact do agricultural development activities have onbiodiversity?

2) How can sustainable uses of biodiversity enhance agriculturaldevelopment?

3) How can economy-wide and agriculture policies andprogrammes be modified to reduce biodiversity losses?

4) What factors constraint policy adjustments and institutionalreforms?

5) What are the tradeoffs between agricultural developmentobjectives and biodiversity conservation, and how can theybe evaluated?

Topics: agricultural economy, agrobiodiversity conservation,agricultural development, biodiversity in the World Bank Portfolios.

Coverage: Global

Contains examples or case studies from Bangladesh, Borneo, Brazil,Costa Rica, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Sudan,Sumatra and Uruguay.

# 49 Pimental, D., T. W. Culliney, I.W. Buttler, D.J. Reinemann and K.B.Beckman. 1989. Ecological Resource management for a Productive,Sustainable Agriculture. pp. 301-323 In: Food and Natural Resources.Academic Press, New York.

This older article is still relevant, in that it points out that manyeconomies can be made in the transition to sustainable agriculture.

High production costs in United States agriculture are due in part toenvironmental degradation, and in part to the costly inputs of fertilizers,pesticides and fossil fuel. The authors propose that by employingvarious alternative practices that improve the environment and theuse of reduced, as they show in two models of the corn (maize)production system. A wide array of soil and water conservationtechnologies exist that could help reduce pesticide inputs. Theapproach is needed now, as economic problems and growingenvironmental concerns plus the challenges of producing more worldfood are encouraging agriculture to look to improved resourcemanagement practices.

Coverage: United States

Topics: Soil management, natural pest control, sustainable agriculture

Case studies or examples from: United States.

# 50 Pimentel, D., C. Harvey, P. Resosudarmo, K. Sinclair, D. Kurz, M.McNair, S. Crist, L. Shpritz, L. Fitton, R. Saffouri, R. Blair. 1995.Environmental and Economic Cost of Soil Erosion and ConservationBenefits. Science 267: 1117-1122.

Soil erosion is a major environmental threat to the sustainability andproductive capacity of the earth. During the last 40 years, this analysesestimates that nearly one-third of the world’s arable land has beeneroded and continues to be lost at a rate of more than 10 millionhectares per year. With the addition of a quarter of a million peopleeach day, the world population’s food demand is increasing at a timewhen per capita food productivity is beginning to decline.

The authors estimate that it would take an investment of $6.4 billion peryear ($40 per hectare) to reduce US erosion rates from about 17tons/ha/yr to a sustainable rate of 1 ton/ha/yr on most cropland. Toreduce erosion on pastureland, the United States would have to spendan additional $2.0 billion per year ($5 per hectare for conservation).The total investment for US erosion control would be about $8.4 billionper year. Given that erosion causes about $4.4 billion in damageseach year, it would seem that this is a small price to pay.

When the economic costs of soil loss and degradation and off-siteeffects are conservatively estimated into the cost/benefit analysis ofagriculture, it makes sound economic sense to invest in programs thatare effective in the control of widespread erosion. Human survival andprosperity depend on adequate supplies of food, land, water, energyand biodiversity. Infertile, poor-quality land will not sustain foodproduction at the levels required by the growing world population.

Coverage: United States

Topics: ecosystem services, soil erosion

# 51 Pimental, D., U. Stachow, D.A. Takacs, H.W. Brubaker, A.R. Drumas,J.J. Meaney, J.A.S. O’Neil, D.E. and D.B. Corzilius. 1992. ConservingBiological Diversity in Agricultural/Forestry Systems. Biosciences 42(5):354-362.

This paper discusses a misallocation of attention to biodiversity inprotected areas, versus the abundance and threats to biodiversity inhuman dominated landscapes. Humans manipulate 70% of thetemperature and tropical ecosystems to harvest 98% of their food andall of their wood products. Approximately 50% of the terrestrial area isdevoted to agriculture, approximately 20% to commercial forests, andanother 25% is occupied by human settlements, which include cities,towns and villages. Thus, most species are located in the area that ismanaged for agriculture, forestry and human settlements. Forexample, in West Germany only 35 to 40% of the total 30,000 speciesare found in protected areas; the remaining species live in human-managed ecosystems. In addition to protecting the integrity of parks,the conservation efforts of biological diversity in agricultural, forest, andother managed ecosystems must be expanded. To date, humanshave destroyed approximately 44% of the world’s tropical forests.Approximately 80% of the total 20 million ha/yr of deforestation is dueto the conversion of forests to agricultural lands. The deterioration ofcurrent agricultural land, combined with the increasing population,results in approximately 15 million ha of new agricultural land beingneeded each year to satisfy human food needs.

Techniques of agricultural and forest production which both conservebiodiversity and promote productivity are mentioned, including use ofcrop residues to restore soil fertility, cover crops, multispecies forestsand gardens, shelterbelts and hedgerows, intercrops, soil and waterconservation, crop rotations, strip cropping, contour planting,terracing, ridge planting, no-till, use of livestock manure, habitatdiversity on farm, agroforestry, mixed forest, pasture management,stable ecosystems with protected microenvironments, and reductionof pesticide use.

The needs and activities of escalating numbers of humans arechanging natural ecosystems at rapid rates. Millions of species live andcarry out vital functions in the biosphere and are essential to society.Yet, the importance of most species of animals and plants, -the smallorganisms that make up more that 95% of all species-is beingoverlooked. Because the organisms are small, the benefits to

agriculture and forestry of these less-conspicuous organisms, such asarthropods and fungi, are often not recognized. During the pastdecades, focus has been on saving the relatively low number of largeanimals. Setting aside parks for the species has heightened publicawareness and benefited the fight to save these often beautifulcreatures. However, preserving the greater diversity of all species oforganisms should be the aim of conservation projects.

The following policies are recommended to enhance the conservationof biological diversity:

♦ Develop more accurate measures for assessing the value thatsmall and large organisms have for protecting the quality ofthe environment and work to disseminate this information toscientists, farmers foresters, policy makers and all concernedcitizens.

♦ Encourage ecologically sound and sustainable managementpractices in agriculture and forestry.

♦ Adopt biological controls for pests and encourage greateruse of biological resources for agriculture and forestry systemsto replace pesticides, fertilizers, and other chemicals.

♦ Encourage society to dedicate itself to protecting biologicaldiversity to provide a quality environment for every one andto have a productive, sustainable agriculture and forestry.Concern should not be for one species or one factor, but forthe integrated management of the earth’s natural resourcesas a whole.

Coverage; global

Topics: wild biodiversity in agricultural landscapes

Case studies or examples from: United States, Kenya, Russia, Japan,United Kingdom, Hungary, China, India.

# 52 Pimentel, D., C. Wilson, C. McCullum, R. Huang, P. Owen, J. Flack,Q. Tran, T. Saltman and B. Cliff. 1997. Economics and EnvironmentalBenefits of Biodiversity. BioScience 47(11): 747-757.

The vital services provided by biodiversity to humans and theenvironment are analysed in this paper. This assessment of theenvironmental and economic benefits of biodiversity will assist thedevelopment of strategies and policies to enhance the conservationof biological diversity.

The analysis concludes that most of the services provided by the

diverse plant and animal species, including pollination, wastedegradation, and biological pest control, cannot be provided by anyhuman technology either known today or projected for the future.Biodiversity itself helps preserve the functioning of a healthy ecosystem.These services are jeopardised and fail to work adequately whenhuman pollute or deplete resources on which such services are based.The estimated economic and environmental benefits of biodiversity inthe United States and the world are $316 billion, and $3,150 billion peryear, respectively. These appraised economic benefits are estimatesat best, but they enlarge out understanding of the many essentialservices that diverse species provide humans. Practical policies andprograms that will protect biodiversity for human society to maintain aproductive, healthy environment must be given high priority.

Among the specific services which are appraised and costed withinthe paper are: decomposition of waste material, soil formation,nitrogen fixation, bioremediation of chemical pollution, geneticengineering, crop and animal genetic resources, biological control, ofpests, how plant resistance and pest control, pollination, values of wildanimals and plants, harvest of food and drugs from wild biota, andcarbon sequestration.

# 53 Pretty, J.N. 1995. Regenerating Agricuture: Politics and Practicefor Sustainability and Self-Reliance. London, Earthscan Publications.

Regenerating Agriculture looks at the scale of the challenge facingagriculture today and details the concepts and characteristics ofalternativie, sustainable agricultural practices. The author drawstogether new empirical evidence from a diverse range ofagroecological and community settings to show the impacts of moresustainable practices. Using twenty detailed case-studies and fieldand community-level data from more than 50 projects andprogrammes in 28 countries, he identifies the common elements ofsuccess in implementing sustainable practices and shows how toreplicate them. In addition, the book looks at the existing policyframeworks and institutional processes, and sets out 25 alternativepolicies which are known to work to support the shift to greater self-reliance and sustainability in agriculture.

Coverage: Global

Topics: sustainable agriculture, policy

Contains examples or case studies from: Philippines, China, Mexico,USA, Africa, Japan, Indonesia, Tanzania, Bali, India, Sri Lanka,Botswana, Nepal, Burkina Faso, Australia, United Kingdom, Brazil,Honduras, Kenya, Lesotho, Mali, Peru,

# 54 Pretty, J. and R. Hine. 2000. Feeding the World with SustainableAgriculture: A summary of New Evidence. Final Report for the “SAFE-World” (The Potential of Sustainable Agriculture to Feed the World)Research Project, University of Essex.

Over the past 40 years, per capita food production has grown by 25%,and food prices in real terms have fallen by40%. Yet the world stillfaces a fundamental food security challenge, due to populationgrowth. The conventional wisdom is that, in order to double foodsupply as needed, we need to redouble efforts to modernizeagriculture. But there are doubts about the capacity of such systemsto reduce food poverty. The poor and hungry need low-cost andreadily available technologies and practices to increase local foodproduction. Moreover, the success of modern agriculture has oftenmasked significant externalities, affecting both natural capital andhuman health, as well as agriculture itself. In this document, theoptions of a more sustainable agriculture are explored, and sometentative conclusions are drawn about the value of increasing foodproduction based on locally available resources in developingcountries.

The aim of the SAFE-World research project was to audit and databaserecent worldwide progress towards sustainable agriculture, an assessthe degree to which such projects/initiatives could be ramped up to alarger scale. As of October 2000, the database contained informationon 208 cases from 52 countries. In these projects/initiatives, some 8.98million farmers have adopted sustainable agriculture practices on28.92 million hectares. Of improvements which have been instituted toimprove sustainable agriculture, the majority have been “on-farm andin-community”. The document notes that little attention, as yet, hasgone to finding ways to link farmers to markets and consumers, and toadd value to produce.

While the 208 projects show clear increased in food production over 29million hectares, these increases are not yet making a significant markon national statistics. The authors attribute this to a significant elasticityof consumption in many rural households-, which are consuming theincreased food surplus, or selling it within national statistics.

The authors conclude that sustainable agriculture can deliver increasesin food production at relatively low cost, plus contribute to otherimportant functions. Were these approaches to be widely adopted,they would make a significant impact on rural people’s livelihoods, aswell as on local and regional food security.

Coverage: Global

Topics: Sustainable agriculture

Case studies or examples from: India, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, China,Philippines, Malawi, Honduras, Peru, Brazil, Mexico, Burkina Faso,Ethiopia, Bangladesh.

# 55 Roling, N.G. and M.A.E. Wagemakers. 1998. FacilitatingSustainable Agriculture. Participatory learning and adaptivemanagement in times of environmental uncertainty. Cambridge,Cambridge University Press.

A move towards more flexible, sustainable agricultural practices isbeing seen increasingly as the way to address or avoid environmentaland economic problems associated with existing, predominantlyintensive, farming systems. This book examines the implications ofadopting more ecologically sound agricultural practices, both at thelevel of individual farmers and at the level of larger-scale agro-ecosystems such as water catchments. The emphasis of the book is onhuman and social aspects, rather than on agronomic or economicconsiderations, focusing on the learning processes necessary forchange to be implemented at, in turn, on the facilitation of thatlearning through participatory approaches and appropriateinstitutional support and policy structure.

Coverage: global

Topics: sustainable agriculture

Contains examples or case studies from: Switzerland, Greece,Netherlands, Germany, Indonesia, Australia, USA

# 56 Roodman, D.M. 1998. The Natural Wealth of Nations: Harnessingthe Market for the Environment. Worldwatch Publications, Washington,D.C.

The Natural Wealth of Nations offers concrete solutions toenvironmental problems by removing harmful subsides, and using thepower of the market to protecting natural wealth and human health.Among the sectors which are currently heavily subsidised, anddiscussed in this book is the agricultural sector.

Coverage: Global

Agroecosystem focus: General

Topics: environmental economics, perverse incentives, subsidies,

market mechanisms, environmental taxes.

# 57 Roubik, D. W. 1995a. Pollination of cultivated plants in the tropics.Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome. FAO Agricultural ServicesBulletin 118, 196pp.

This extremely useful book is intended as a guide for development ofpollination resources in the tropics. It first introduces the reader tovarious aspects of natural and insect pollination. Topics in the first partinclude the pollinators; the ecological and economic importance ofpollination; applied pollination in temperate area, tropical oceanicislands and mainland tropics; and alternative to artificial pollinatorpopulations. Prospects for the future are also discussed. The secondpart considers successful pollination with pollinator populations; theevaluation of pollinators; floral biology and research techniques; thebehaviour of pollinators and plant phenology and various case studieson the preparation of pollinators for use in tropical agriculture. Anappendix is provided on cultivated and semi-cultivated plants in thetropics, pollination contracts, and levels of safety of pesticides for beesand other pollinators.

Coverage: Global

Topics: Pollination

# 58 Ruiz, M. and R. Poona. 2000. Going Home: A manual on theRepatriation of Information from Ex-situ Conservation and ResearchInstitutions to Countries of Origin. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, UK.

This manual seeks to provide readers with basic information on whatrepatriation is and how it takes place. Using examples and a step-by-step approach it hopes to offer clear guidelines for both thedevelopment of wider repatriation strategies and more focused,specific initiatives.

The manual concerns itself primarily with botanic gardens andherbaria. However, much of the methodology outlined could equallybe applied to other institutions such as zoos, zoological museums andcollections of microorganisms.

The procedures outlined may be particularly relevant to nationalprograms to inventory and conserve soil microorganisms, pollinators,and natural pest control agents, as the richest collections of these areoften held in developed country institutions. The manual is highlyrelevant to national biodiversity planning.

Coverage: Global

Topics: repatriation, inventories, taxonomy

Case studies or examples from: Brazil

# 59 Smith, N.J. H.1996. Effects of Land Use Systems on the Use andConservation of Biodiversity. Pp. 52-79 in: Srivastava, J., N.J.H. Smithand D. Forno,eds. 1996. Biodiversity and Agricultural Intensification:Partners for Development and Conservation. EnvironmentallySustainable Development Studies and Monograph Series No.11. TheWorld Bank, Washington, D.C.

The paper seeks to establish a conceptual framework to guide analysisof the interrelationships between biodiversity and agriculturalproduction systems. Then, it seeks to focus on the following policy-related questions: How do agricultural production systems andagricultural sector policies, institutions and programs includingtechnology choices affect biodiversity? How does the conservation ofbiodiversity help improve the sustainability of agriculture? How canagricultural development policies enhance biodiversity?

Four perspective underlie the analysis: cultural landscapes (virtually allecosystems on earth have been modified by humans); land-usedynamic (shifts in the mix of agricultural production systems in a givenarea enhance or destroy biodiversity; driving forces. Those forces suchas shifts in market opportunities or fiscal incentives that influence landuse change) and the intensification/resiliency relationship.

Policy implication of specific land use systems are examined, includingintensive cropping, shifting agriculture, agropastoralist system,agroforestry, and plantation systems.

Overriding policy issues are then brought out, including the need for anew agricultural research and development policy, the importance ofsocioeconomic infrasructure and property rights. It is proposed thatagricultural development projects always include biodiversityperformance indicators, and that rapid agrobiodiversity surveys areundertaken before a rural development project is started.

As well, more biodiversity conservation projects should be focused onconservation of agrobiodiversity and wild relatives of useful species

Coverage: Global

Topics: land-use systems and biodiversity, policy issues

Contains examples or case studies from: Brazil, Columbia, Peru,Mexico, UK, Malaysia.

# 60 Srivastava, J., N.J.H. Smith & D. Forno. 1996. Biodiversity andAgriculture: Implications for Conservation and Development. TheWorld Bank, Washington, D.C. World Bank Technical Paper 321.

For too long the agriculture and environmental communities havebeen at odds with each other over biodiversity when in fact they sharemany concerns. Agriculture is often cast as a homogenization agenton the landscape, obliterating much of the biodiversity to make roomfro crops and livestock. Some agricultural practices also triggerdownstream impacts on biodiversity, such as water pollution withagrochemicals. While it is true that agriculture has caused harm to theenvironment, agriculture is the key to saving biodiversity and farmingand livestock practices can be honed to minimize environmentaldamage. Agriculture and biodiversity are inter-linked. Withoutbiodiversity, agriculture cannot progress. Biodiversity in both wild andmanaged habitats is a vital resource for crop and livestockimprovement. And without improved agriculture, most of theremaining habitats for wildlife will be destroyed to make room forfarms, plantations, and ranches. Biodiversity is thus much more thanthe preservation of habitats for unique and interesting plants andanimals. People in rural, and even urban, areas are intimately involvedin using biodiversity to supply their needs. Most of the earth’s surfacehas been transformed by human activities and how biologicalresources are treated in cultural landscapes will largely determine howmuch biodiversity survives in the next century. Both indigenousknowledge and scientific research are needed to meet the challengeof intensifying agriculture in an environment-friendly manner andunderstanding how the landscape mosaic of cultural habitats couldcontribute to conservation of biodiversity.

The paper seeks to identify the critical issues surrounding agriculturaldevelopment and biodiversity such as:

1) what are the fundamental relationships between the use ofagricultural resources and loss of biodiversity, both on and offfarm?

2) How do agricultural policies and development programs,including technology choices, impact biodiversity both onand off farm?

3) How could such policies and practices b modified toharmonise biodiversity conservation with agriculturaldevelopment?

4) What are the constraints (technical, institutional, financial,social and botanical) that inhibit such modification?

The paper does not offer answers; rather it proposes in-depth reviewsand in-country studies for a better understanding of the questionsraised above.

Coverage: Global

Topics: conflicts and compatibilities between agriculture andbiodiversity. Impacts of agriculture in different land use systems.Biodiversity in the World Bank portfolios.

Contains examples or case studies from: West Africa, Indonesia

# 61 Srivastava, J., N.J.H. Smith and D. Forno, eds, 1996. Biodiversityand Agricultural Intensification: Partners for Development andConservation. Environmental Sustainable Development Studies andMonograph Series No. 11. The World Bank, Washington, D.C.

This volume of papers on biodiversity and agricultural intensificationargues that biodiversity must be better managed and conserved if thetwin challenges of improving living standards and enhancing theenvironment for all of humanity are to be met. Examples are given ofhow agrobiodiversity is being tapped to intensify agriculture in asustainable manner.

# 62 Srivastava, J., N.J.H. Smith and D. Forno. 1996. Agriculture asFriend and Foe of Biodiversity. Pp. 1-10 in: Srivastava, J.,N.H. Smith andD. Forno, eds, 1996. Biodiversity and Agricultural Intensification:Partners for Development and Conservation. EnvironmentallySustainable Development Studies and Monograph Series No. 11. TheWorld Bank, Washington, D.C.

Agricultural intensification is usually defined as more purchased inputssuch as fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and machinery. The paperinvestigates how society might provide incentives to make agriculturalintensification more sustainable and ecological, such as throughrational use of nutrients, space, and energy in all land-use systems,greater recycling of nutrients, better use of biological resources to raiseyields, greater appreciation of indigenous knowledge and neglectedcrops, more effective measures for soil and water conservation, anddeployment of environment corridors in agricultural landscapes. Theauthors’ concern is not with tailoring practices to be more“environment-friendly” but more with centrally incorporating greaterbiodiversity within agricultural production systems. They assert thatbenign policies and practices that enhance agricultural productivity aswell as biodiversity conservation are possible. Biodiversity is defined asgenetic, species, and habitat diversity. The focus in this and the

subsequent papers in this volume is not on safeguarding naturalhabitats, which may contain elements of agrobiodiversity, but onwisely managing habitats that have been modified for human use,such as farmland. Within this, there is a stress on the “off-site” effects ofland-use systems, including reduction or elimination of agriculturalpollutants in groundwater and in run-off, and greater emphasis onintegrated pest management strategies.

Coverage: Global

Topics: agricultural intensification, mainstreaming biodiversity intoagricultural policy, off-site effects, natural enemy conservation.

Contains examples or case studies from: Amazon, Latin America, WestJava, Costa Rica.

# 63 Srivastava, J.P., smith, N.J.H. and Forno, D.A. 1999. IntegratingBiodiversity in Agricultural Intensification: Toward Sound Practices.Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development. RuralDevelopment. The World Bank. (Work in progress for Public discussion).

This report underlines the critical role of agrobiodiversity in intensifyingagriculture. It also emphasizes that biodiversity will be safeguardedonly if contributes in a perceptible way to human welfare and ifessential needs are being met from areas already in production. Ithighlights ways in which agrobiodiversity can be utilized moreeffectively to boost productivity. It presents case studies in whichmodern and traditional agriculture have been successfully transformedto enhance biodiversity without sacrificing yield. Practical ways areidentified to better manage and conserve the biological resourcesthat support crop and livestock production.

Lessons learned from this review help to identify sound practices fordesigning and monitoring agricultural projects so that they improverural incomes while safeguarding biodiversity. The main challenges areto boost productivity of traditional systems while maintaining theirenvironmental friendly characteristics, and to transform modernagriculture so that environmental damage is reduced or eliminated asyields increase. A great deal of diversity is found in managedlandscapes. A better management of these biological resourceswould help to meet the challenge. However, as the reportemphasizes, technological ‘solutions’ alone will neither sustain greateragricultural productivity nor enhance biodiversity in the long run. Thesuccessful protection of biodiversity depends on a favourable policyenvironment and on agricultural research and extension activities thatstress farmer participation and greater sensitivity to the off-site impactof agriculture. Thus, suggestions for sound practices include

modifications of the policy environment and ways to strengthenresearch institutions and extension services in such a way thatagriculture can be intensified while better protecting and managingbiological resources.

In many agricultural research programmes not enough consideration isbeing given to ways to better harmonise biodiversity conservation andagricultural development. To address this the report highlights policy,institutional, and technological issues to improve agricultural projectsdesigned to boost crop and livestock yields while incorporating greaterbiodiversity and reducing pressure on wildlife habitats.

The paper also stresses the importance of local participation byfarmers and their communities, as major stakeholders in biodiversitymanagement. It states that a blend of indigenous knowledge andscientific research will be needed to further the transformation ofagricultural systems so that they are more biodiversity friendly andachieve higher productivity.

The report analyses the role of the World Bank as a leader in providingideas and approaches to development rather than merely as afinancial source. The role of governments and internationaldevelopment institutions is to identify and help remove constraints tothe better use and safeguarding of biodiversity. It presents variousinstruments at the disposal of the bank to influence the way in whichbiodiversity is mainstreamed into agricultural development.

It concludes that follow-up work is needed to visit apparentlysuccessful cases where biodiversity has been mainstreamed inagricultural development so that more data can be obtained to back-up policy recommendations. This would also provide opportunity tointeract with stakeholders in borrower countries in order to arrive atrealistic recommendation for sound practices.

Coverage: Global

Topics: Agrobiodiversity conservation, agricultural intensification,agricultural development, and agricultural development projects.

Case studies or examples from: Bangladesh, Brazil, Costa Rica, India,Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Turkey, Uruguay.

# 64 Swaminathan, M.S. (ed.) 1996. Agrobiodiversity and Farmers’Rights. The Swaminathan Foundation, New Delhi, India. Xvi, 303 p.

This volume considers the term agrobiodiversity to refer to geneticvariability in plants, animals and microorganisms of economic value.

As such, it provides the feedstock for the breeding and biotechnologyenterprises. The future of food and healthy security depends on theconservation and sustainable use of such diversity. This book deals withthe equity part of the utilization of agrobiodiversity. Today, thetraditional conservers live in poverty, while the utilisers experienceprosperity. How can the equity provisions of CBD and the concept offarmers’ rights developed in the Forum of FAO, i.e., the rights of tribaland rural women and men who have not only conserved geneticvariability but also enriched them through selection and informationand thereby deserve to be recognized and rewarded, be convertedinto reality? The volume proposes concrete ways forward.

Contents: Background paper. Inaugural session. 1. The national andinternational context. 2. Plant variety protection and the conventionon biodiversity. 3. Viewpoint of the plant breeding industry. 4.Viewpoint of public sector plant breeding institutions. 5. Tribal and ruralfarmer-conservers. 6. Role of the mass media. Recommendations ofparticipants. Annexure 1:Financial arrangements for the realization offarmers’ rights. Appendix: 1 Plant variety protection and farmers’ rightsAct. 2. National income accounts. Annexure: 2. Uncommonopportunities for achieving sustainable food and nutrition security.

Coverage: Global

Topics: Farmers’ Rights, intellectual property rights, plant varietyprotection, crop genetic resources.

# 65 Thies, E. 2000. Incentive Measures Appropriate to Enhance theConservation and Sustainable Use of Agrobiodiversity. GTZ, Eschborn,Germany.

This study analyzes whether incentive measures designed for thepromotion of conservation and sustainable use of natural resources aretransferable to agrobiodiversity and if so, which ones. For this purpose,existing activities that apply incentive measures in developmentcooperation have been evaluated with regard to their design,implementation and impact. Since measures are political instrumentsaiming to encourage politically desirable ways of acting and todiscourage undesirable ones, key problems and adverse incentiveshave to be identified before entering the process of design. They arelinked to the valuation of natural resources, in particular biodiversity,which is a complex subject, characterized by numerousinterdependencies, ignorance of details and uncertainty aboutprobable management impacts. Valuation therefore is difficult, due tothe lack of scientific knowledge and objective valuation criteria. Inaddition, private short-term economic interests quite often determine

the valuation, leaving little space for the manifestation of public valuesand long-term sustainability considerations. Market prices do notreflect the real value of biological resources and their servicesbecause of a failure to internalize external costs. Genetic resourcesrepresent above all option and quasi-option values, and specificincentive measures for their realization are not common. Onepossibility in this context is to apply the precautionary principle ingeneral policy-making. The challenge is to allocate values to both, theprivate and the public functions of biodiversity. These values have tobe transparent and easily understandable and must be translated intoincentive measures and action. Several types of incentive measuresexist, and the most appropriate are often a mix.

With the exception of wild relatives, agrobiodiversity is not an “openaccess common,” such as are many forests or wildlife. It is managedprivately or in communities, either for subsistence or commercialpurpose. The more it is managed fro commercial purposes, the morehigh-yielding crops and breeds are used, and the less important is thetraditional minimization of risks through the use of a high diversity ofvarieties, typical of subsistence farming. Agrobiodiversity is threatenedbecause most commercial production focuses on a few major cropsand breeds, often already introduced during colonial time andsometimes still propagated by national policy and developmentprojects. A multitude of traditional breeds and crops are consideredlow-performing varieties. This however leads to the irreversible loss ofgenetic diversity essential for genetic improvement, which is decisivefor current and future food security.

Consequently, agrobiodiversity is threatened because it is not usedand not because it is overused, as is the case with many wildlife or treespecies. Sustainable use of agrobiodiversity therefore often means“increased use” instead of restriction. Consequently, in-situmanagement of agrobiodiversity therefore often means “increaseduse” instead of restriction. Consequently, in situ management ofagrobiodiversity is a very active process, as is ex-situ conservation.Since traditional, neglected and under-utilized breeds and crops havetheir present characteristics only because they have been activelyselected, conserving them means more than just shielding them.

Particular “agrobiodiversity criteria” fro the transferability of incentivemeasures follow from the afore-mentioned considerations. However, itis the framework conditions in particular which the author judges to bedecisive for the success of incentives. These may be multilateral orbilateral agreements, good governance, the legislative framework andenforcement, national and regional economy, research activities,traditional knowledge or the uniqueness of certain agrobiologicalresources. Agriculture is often an intensively subsidized economic

sector. Therefore most prices are distorted and do not reflect the realcost of production. In addition, food-for-work programs or long-termfree food supply may strongly influence local and national markets.The combination of these factors may result in an adverse incentivewith regard to the sustainability of agriculture and the conservationand sustainable use of plant and animal genetic resources. Theremoval of these adverse incentives may already have a considerableimpact.

In most OECD countries, the government’s steering function is muchstronger than in developing countries. In developing countries, it istherefore often the donor community that assumes the role of thegovernment in designing and implementing incentives.

As such, a development project can be regarded as a series ofincentives. Therefore, project-initiated incentives have to take intoaccount the framework conditions to increase the probability ofsuccess, i.e., a sustainable change in valuation and resultingmanagement priorities. On the other hand, framework conditions,such as the ratification of the convention for biological Diversity or anational strategy to implement the Global Plan of Action for plantgenetic resources, can facilitate decision-making and design,implementation and monitoring of incentives.

Besides the general activities dedicated to capacity-building andinformation exchange, the following types of incentive measures seemto be the most promising:

♦ Removal of adverse subsidies♦ Environmental funds and public financing♦ Benefit-sharing agreements♦ Intellectual Property Rights♦ Market creation and support for commercialization♦ Access to and use of information about available genetic

resources.

Many experiences concerning incentives for the conservation andsustainable use of agrobiodiversity are related to plant geneticresources. Therefore, approaches should be analyzed to determinewhether any of them are transferable to animal genetic resources andif so, which ones.

Coverage: Global

Topics: incentive measures.

# 66 Thrupp, L.A. 1998. Cultivating Diversity: Agrobiodiversity and FoodSecurity. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Agrobiodiversity is increasingly recognised as the fundamental basis ofagricultural production and food security. Yet, this diversity is beingrapidly lost throughout the world. Although the policies of the Green-Revolution – that of promoting monocultural systems, uniform cropvarieties and agrochemical inputs, have contributed to aggregateincreases in production in many areas, these patterns have alsoeroded agricultural biodiversity and degraded other natural resources,contributing to serious economic loss and human suffering.

Internationally, mandates have been made to assure food security.However these agreements are inefficient and have not producedlong-term effects on food production. And, although the Conventionon Biological Diversity provides the framework for protectingintellectual property rights, this is in conflict with other such agreementssuch as those of the World Trade Organization, which establishesprivate regimes over intellectual property, and does not adequatelyvalue local peoples’ rights. What is required is effective action thatcan overcome conflicts and change conventional agriculturalpractices and economic policies.

This book reviews the relationship between ecology, and social andeconomic aspects of sustainable development through reviewing thebenefits of agrobiodiversity and causes of biodiversity loss within theagricultural sector – both proximate and ultimate causes.Incorporating agrobiodiversity into farming practices is outlinedthrough a discussion of strategies, examples and case studies.

Through addressing root problems of policies, paradigms andprotection rights, the author outlines priorities and principles toenhance agrobiodiversity. Noted are the most crucial changes thatare required for the elimination of policies that erode agrobiodiversity(such as subsidies that erode agrobiodiversity (such as subsidies andincentives for agro-chemicals and high-yield varieties) and theadoption of market and trade policies that incorporate ecologicalconcerns. Laws and other measures also require implementation toensure ethical business practices by agricultural technologycompanies and to prevent their unfair control over plant geneticresources.

Coverage: Global

Case studies or examples from: global examples and case studies, withregional priorities given for East Africa.

Topics: benefits and causes of biodiversity. Best practices thatenhance agrobiodiversity. International policy and recommendations.

# 67 Thrupp, L.A. 1996. New Partnerships for Sustainable Agriculture.World Resources Institute, Washington D.C.

What works to develop sustainable agriculture practices? From ricepaddies in Bangladesh to cornfields in lowa, innovative people andorganizations are working together and making progress to replacechemical-intensive farming methods with alternative approaches. Thenine case studies featured in this report from Asia, Africa and LatinAmerica and north America show how ecologically-orientedintegrated pest and crop management practices can maintain orincrease yields, increase soil quality and resilience, reduceagrochemical inputs and costs, and achieve other benefits. Thoughrepresenting distinct farming systems, different geographical zones andscales, and varied cultures, the cases highlight common elements ofsuccess as well as constraints that must be overcome to implementand maintain sustainable and profitable production practices.

Coverage: Global

Topics: Sustainable production practices

Case studies or examples from: Bangladesh, Philippines; Cuba,Nicaragua, Senegal, Kenya; BIOS, and USA.

# 68 Thrupp, L.A. 1989. Legitimizing Local knowledge: fromDisplacement to Empowerment for Third World People. Agriculture andHuman Values 6(3): 13-24.

# 69 Thrupp, L.A., B. Cabarle, and A. Zazueta. 1994. Participatorymethods in planning and political processes: linking the grassroots andpolicies for sustainable Development. Agriculture and Human Values11(2-3): 77-84.

These two publications discuss ways in which traditional knowledgesystems are critical to the sustainability of farming and natural resourcemanagement. Local people have evolved with their environmentsand have acquired considerable knowledge about the locations andappropriate sources. The integrity of cultural systems that haveadapted to the numerous habitats on earth is therefore an essentialpart of biodiversity conservation. How and why rural people conserve,enhance and use biodiversity has rarely been taken into accountwhen designing management interventions and devising policy foragricultural development and natural resource management. Theactive participation of farmers, ranchers and pastoralists – andespecially resource- poor operators is essential in designing andcarrying out biodiversity and agricultural development projects.

Incorporating indigenous knowledge is thus an integral part of the newparadigm for agricultural research and development that is emerging.

Coverage: Global

Agroecosystem focus: General

Topics: participatory methods, sustainable development, naturalresource policy.

# 70 Thrupp, L.A. with N. Megateli. 1999. Critical Links: Food securityand the environment in the Greater Horn of Africa. WRI Project Report.World Resources Institute, Washington DC and International LivestockResearch Institute, Nairobi, Kenya. 110pp.

The challenges of overcoming hunger, conflict, entrenched povertyand environmental deterioration in the Greater Horn of Africa regionremain daunting. Responses, up until now have been largely throughfood aid and other emergency programs. However, these short-termmeasures do not account for sustainable solutions. An importantgeneral strategy to address this challenge is to integrate environmentalconcerns into efforts to achieve food security, as environmental andfood security are closely line. Sound management of natural resourcesparticularly the use of sustainable agricultural practices is needed forfood production, secure access to food, and hunger alleviation. It canalso reduce environmental stress and related social conflict. This reportprovides a synthesis of major challenges and opportunities in the foodsecurity- environmental nexus**, to help clarify the linkages. Theanalysis concludes with the key strategic principles that are needed toreverse the downward spiral of hunger, resource degradation, povertyand conflict.

Coverage: Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Somalia, Kenya, Uganda,Tanzania, Rwanda, and Burundi.

Topics: sustainable agriculture, agricultural policy, food security

Case studies or examples from: Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Sudan

# 71 Tilman, D. 1998. The greening of the green revolution. Nature Vol.396:211-212.

In comparison with conventional, high-intensity agricultural methods,‘organic’ alternatives can improve soil fertility and have fewerdetrimental effects on the environment. These alternatives can alsoproduce equivalent crop yields to conventional methods.

The article discusses an experiment in which two alternative, organicpractices for growing maize (with manure and legume crops) werecompared with intensive systems of applying pesticides and mineralnitrogen fertilizers. Ten-year average maize yields differed by less than1% among the three cropping systems, which were equally profitable.

The intensification of agriculture has broken what was once the tight,local recycling of nutrients on individual farms. A greener revolution isneeded, a revolution is needed, a revolution that incorporatesaccumulated knowledge of ecological processes and feedbacks,disease dynamics, soil processes and microbial ecology.

Coverage: global

Topics: environmental impacts of agriculture, sustainable agriculture.

# 72 Tilman, D. 1998. Global environmental impacts of agriculturalexpansion: The need for sustainable and efficient practices. Paperwas presented at the National Academy of Sciences colloquium“Plants and Population: Is There Time?” held December 5-6, 1998, at theArnold and Mabel Beckman Center in Irvine, CA. Available online athttp://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/96/11/5995

The recent intensification of agriculture, and the prospects of futureintensification, will have major detrimental impacts on the non-agricultural terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems of the world. Thedoubling of agricultural food production during the past35 years wasassociated with a 6.87-fold increase in nitrogen fertilization, a 3.48-foldincrease in phosphorus fertilization, a 1.1-fold increase in land incultivation. Based on a simple linear extension of past trends, theanticipated next doubling of global food production would beassociated with approximately 3-fold increases in nitrogen andphosphorus fertilization rates, a doubling of the irrigated land area, andan 18% increase in cropland. These projected changes would havedramatic impacts on the diversity, composition, and functioning of theremaining natural ecosystems of the world, and on their ability toprovide society with a variety of essential ecosystem services. Thelargest impacts would be on freshwater and marine ecosystems, whichwould be greatly eutrophied by high rates and phosphorus releasefrom agricultural fields. Aquatic nutrient eutrophication can lead toloss of biodiversity, outbreaks of nuisance species, shifts in the structureof food chains, and impairment of fisheries. Because of aerialredistribution of various forms of nitrogen, agricultural intensificationalso would atrophy many natural terrestrial ecosystems and contributeto atmospheric accumulation of greenhouse gases. These detrimentalenvironmental impacts of agriculture can be minimized only if there is

much more efficient use and recycling of nitrogen and phosphorus inagroecosystems.

Coverage: global

Topics: environmental impacts of agriculture, sustainable agriculture.

Case studies or examples from: United States

# 73 UNEP and FAO. 200 Our land, Our future: A new approach to landuse planning and management, pdf document available for downloadat http://www.fao.org.

This highly illustrated document seeks to raise public awareness aroundcurrent land management challenges of population growth, hungerand poverty, social and political conflicts, mass migrations and landdegradation. The document calls for a strategy, which can permitboth development and conservation, starting with the land itself. Itnotes that everyone has a stake in sustainable land use, but the aimsand activities of stakeholders are often in conflict. The root cause ofthe conflict, and of land degradation, is people’s inability to developeffective institutional frameworks for conflict resolution and efficientand sustainable land use. The document then defines conflictresolution as “Negotiated agreement using mechanisms andinstitutions that accurately reflect the view of all stakeholders” andillustrates the steps of identifying the stakeholders, educating andinforming, creating forums for negotiation, agreeing on the rules, andempowering the people. Four incentives, to conserve are alsoillustrated: security of tenure, productive land conservation techniques,people’s participation, and charges and sanctions. A blueprint for apractical program for sustainable land use is proposed.

Topics: sustainable land management incentive measures foragrobiodiversity conservation.

Coverage: Global

# 74 UPWARD. 1998. Conservation and Change: Farmer managementof Agricultural Biodiversity in the Context of Development. UPWARD(Users’ Perspectives with Agricultural Research and Development), LosBanos, Laguna, Philippines, 267pp. ISBN 971-614-015-0. Available from:UPWARD, Los Banos Luguna, P.O. Box 3127, Makati Central Post Office1271, Makati City, Philippines . Fax (63-49) 536 16 62, e-mail: CIP-Maniola@cgiar.org

Includes an overview of local maintenance of crop biodiversity in thePhilippines, among other interesting approaches related to agricultural

management of biodiversity in different regions of this country.

Coverage: Philippines

Agroecosystem focus: rice agroecosystem

Topics: farm level management of agrobiodiversity

Contains examples or case studies from: Philippines.

# 75 Vietmeyer, N. 1996. Harmonising Biodiversity Conservation andAgricultural Development. Pp. 11-30 in: Srivastava, J.,N.J.H. Smith andD. Forno, ends. 1996. Biodiversity and Agricultural Intensification:Partners for Development and conservation. EnvironmentallySustainable Development Studies and Monograph Series No.11. TheWorld Bank, Washington, D.C.

Genetic uniformity raises the danger that crop and livestock resourcescould succumb to diseases or pests. The ability of agricultural andpastoral systems to adjust to change and meet ever-increasingdemands for food and other agricultural products thus hinges on theavailability of a broad range of plant and animal resources. Onlywhen the integrity of this genetic safety net is assured can agricultureremain productive and resilient in the face of unexpected shocks.Gives examples from history of catastrophic crop collapses, includingwheat, potato, and cassava, and the genetic solutions that havebeen provided by wild relatives of crops. Mention is made of new usesfor unconsidered plants, such as in wastewater treatment and soilrestoration. Wild biodiversity has a role to play both in pest control,and in sometimes turning from being a pest to a new and valuedresource, as with quelea in Zimbabwe. Wild animals continue toprovide an important source of protein, and many species are findingincreased value as new domestications, such as iguana in Costa Rica.Heirloom seed saver and rare breed organizations are providing animportant role in rescuing vulnerable genetic stock. Pockets of diverseagricultural production systems, in for example the Amazon, Rwanda,or Syria, are gaining increased recognition and respect as new modelsof biodiversity-friendly agriculture are sought.

Farming of endangered species, such as crocodiles in Papua NewGuinea and within endangered habitats (butterfly farms in threatenedforests, for example) are highlighted, with the point made that “anyspecies that can prove its worth to people can stake a stronger claimto survival”.

It is proposed that “World Heritage Gene Sites” be developed, toensure protected area coverage for primitive ancestors and wild

relatives of major food crops. The importance of assessing impacts ofdevelopment projects on agrobiodiversity is stressed, and specialventure capital fund that recognizes the needs of biodiverse farming isproposed.

Coverage: Global

Topics: use of nontraditional species, the role of wild speciesconservation in plant breeding, underutilized food crops.

Case studies or examples from: Kalahari Desert –Botswana, Namibiaand South Africa, United States, Costa Rica, Papua New guinea,Africa, United Kingdom, Malaysia.

# 76 Vorley, W. and D. Keeney, eds. 1998. Bugs in the System:Redesigning the Pesticide Industry for Sustainable Agriculture. London,Earthscan Publications.

This book is an important contribution to the “greening” of bothbusiness and agriculture, as it looks at one of the most environmentallycontroversial industries – the chemical pesticide industry. Loftyintentions of the industry around the 1992 Earth Summit appear to havebecome derailed in a competitive business climate of mergers andmarket shares. Business and scientific trends have turned the pesticideindustry’s focus to biotechnology and seed engineering. Thesedevelopments suggest that what is needed is a deeper restructuring, a“redesign” of the industry to exploit new business opportunitiesservicing a regenerative agricultural system.

Coverage: global

Topics: sustainable agriculture, pest control

# 77 Wood, D. and J.M. Lenné (eds.). 1999. Agrobiodiversity:Characterization, utilization and management. CABI Publishing,Wallingford. 490 pp.

This book brings together the collective knowledge of contributors froma wide diversity of geographical and disciplinary backgrounds, andprovides a broad view of current thought on the composition,management, conservation, and utilization of agrobiodiversity throughimproved farming practices.

Three themes emerge throughout the book. One encompasses thecurrent concept and usage of the word agrobiodiversity and itsrelation to biodiversity. Another, the large part of the book, expoundson the components of agrobiodiversity, their interactions, their impact

on agricultural production, and how to best manage them forsustained food production. The third theme is an examination ofwhether the extensive knowledge of the management ofagrobiodiversity can provide models and practices for the widermanagement of biodiversity. This theme, it is pointed out, runs contraryto the mainstream emphasis of ecological and biodiversity practiceproviding models for agriculture.

A summary of the 18 chapters is presented in the first chapter, and isfurther condensed as follows:

Chapters 1 - 2 define agrobiodiversity and review its historicaldimensions. They describe the development of agriculture and theimportance of agrobiodiversity as the largest source of human food.Delving into international policy setting, the chapters also point outperceived yet erroneous conflict between conservationists of wildbiodiversity and agricultural biodiversity.

Chapters 3 – 7 examine the nature, role and function of the variousimportant components of agrobiodiversity. Genetic diversity betweenand within crop species, and its distribution, assessment andorganization into agroecosystems is discussed, along with two casestudies that demonstrate how natural and human-directedevolutionary forces determine the genetic boundaries of crop diversity.The character and erosion of the diversity of domesticated animals istreated, along with the need for development of information systemsthat will promote successful management of domesticated animalbiodiversity. An examination of the regulation and function of soilbiodiversity is provided, especially how they are affected by variousagricultural practices, and how below-ground biodiversity relates tocrop productivity. Lastly, the evolution of disease diversity inagroecosystems and its generally harmful impact is contrasted with theoverall positive impact of insect diversity in agriculture. An appraisal isgiven for the consequences of pathogen diversity for effectivemanagement of diseases in agroecosystems, and theoretical andpractical considerations, including case studies, are provided foroptimizing insect diversity.

Chapter 8 introduces the management of agrobiodiversity in thebroader environment, through a consideration of the agroecosystemin the landscape. The differences between agroecosystems and otherecosystems from an ecological context are examined under theconcept of the habitat template, the patterns of disturbance andhabitat adversity (or quality), and landscape structure. Two casestudies in contrasting systems are presented to assess how muchdiversity can be supported in an agroecosystem, and to provide a

foundation for a discussion of the effects of intensification inagroecosystems.Chapters 9 – 13 are devoted to agrobiodiversity management issues.Traditional farming systems are shown to have remarkable parallelsacross crops, livestock, cultures, and continents, and the need forcontinued farmer management of agrobiodiversity is stressed. Howcrop diversity is measured and the effects of plant breeding on cropgenetic diversity are reviewed, with consideration of the potentialimpact of modern plant breeding techniques on agrobiodiversity. Theimportance of insect pests, weeds, and pathogens in agroecosystemsare considered, and a review is presented of the effects of pestmanagement practices by chemical, biological, cultural, and genetictechniques on various components of agrobiodiversity. The effects ofconventional modern tillage and alternative tillage methods onagrobiodiversity are also presented, and some general conclusions aredrawn. The last management issue addressed is the relationshipbetween seed management systems and genetic diversity, andtraditional farmer-managed systems are compared with moderncommercial systems within a framework of food production andsustainability.

Chapters 14 and 15 consider various aspects of the conservation ofagrobiodiversity. The evolution of conservation approaches andrecent arguments for its conservation are presented, and the policyand technology of conservation is addressed using the role of IPGRI asan example of an international approach for conservation of plantgenetic resources. The complementarity of conservation methods isdiscussed in the context of agroecosystem conservation. Next, aconceptual framework (for discussion and testing) is provided forvaluing crop genetic resources on-farm, and for supporting strategicdecisions about how to choose crops for conservation in particularplaces.

Chapters 16 – 18 wind up the book by exploring regulatory issues, bydebating whether analogues exist in natural and agriculturalecosystems, and by summarizing other key issues. The standardpractices used by governments to regulate inputs (seeds andpesticides) to agricultural production are considered, and issues areidentified where input regulation can have a significant impact onagrobiodiversity. Changes in common regulatory practices that maybe beneficial to agrobiodiversity are examined. The evolving debateover how diversity, stability, and ecosystem functioning is related toagrobiodiversity is reviewed. Contrary to the mainstream line ofreasoning, the question is posed whether knowledge of traditional andmodern management of agrobiodiversity can throw light on problemsof natural resource conservation. Finally, ways of optimizing

agrobiodiversity for productive agricultural development aresuggested.

Questions addressed: The book provides a comprehensive review ofagrobiodiversity issues, addressing such questions as:1. What is meant by agrobiodiversity, why is it important, how did it

evolve, and what are its components, their functions, andinteractions?

2. How are agrobiodiversity and general biodiversity alike or different,and how are they interrelated? Can knowledge of one be appliedtoward the conservation of the other?

3. What are traditional and modern agrobiodiversity managementpractices, how do they affect ecosystem functions andproductivity, and how well do government policy and regulationsupport best practices in light of current knowledge?

4. By what methods can agrobiodiversity be conserved?

Coverage: Global.